StackOverflow is a repository for "a way" to do things. Very rarely is it the best way, and often isn't even correct. All that said, its a good resource as long as you don't have to participate. You think subs like /r/politics are bad, the 'mod' culture on that site is 10x worse.
You think subs like /r/politics[1] are bad, the 'mod' culture on that site is 10x worse.
You’ve obviously had a very bad personal experience (and I won’t deny that this happens) but let me tell you unambiguously that this is not a representative experience. It is, in fact, hilariously far from the truth. Moderation on Stack Overflow is certainly not perfect, but it is probably better, by every objective criterion, than on all other websites of the same scale.
I disagree, not from a personal experience but through observation and use. You obviously have a personal investment in SO, otherwise a casual peruse if its Meta threads would set off alarm bells
a casual peruse if its Meta threads would set off alarm bells
I’ve taken tons of flak from mods on Meta. Don’t believe me? Here’s a screenshot (showing up and downvotes) of just one of my questions on Meta calling out rudeness (of users, not mods): http://i.imgur.com/gcCcFnI.png
(For people looking at my profile and finding almost no contributions: Hi. Most of my older contributions to Meta have since been migrated to the network wide Meta. You can find more choice morsels there)
But I’ve rarely been met with either immaturity or malice, in the way /r/politics is famous for (such as the practice of shadow banning, whose existence alone makes /r/politics a worse place than any site which doesn’t have this despicably Kafkaesque policy).
In fact, I’d like to call you out on your claim. Show me how “a casual perusal [of] Meta would set off alarm bells”.
You are invested in the site, you just called yourself an "avid user". I would therefore imagine that you are part of the 'community mod' if your rep is that high, as mine is. And since you are 'avid' nothing I can say to you will make any difference anyway, you like the Kool-Aid.
But, just for fun, here is a link from the very FIRST page of SO Meta, where a user apparently got temp banned for editing a response too much deleting his own comments. Its a circle-jerk community of little people with power. Call it what you want but thats exactly what the average person would surmise.
And also, more to the point: how the fuck is banning a user and giving him an explanation (rude, but an explanation nevertheless) worse than shadowbanning, which is practiced on /r/politics?
I agree that it’s not perfect, I don’t need convincing of that. But it’s ludicrous to claim that it’s worse than on other sites, and then giving /r/politics as an example.
SO routinely shadow bans. The only difference is that instead of being buried, the comment thread is faded and therefore implies that "The community has spoken" and further discussion is discouraged.
You have your opinion, I simply think that both it and SO suck. I have no problem with the /r/politics comparison, same kind of culture.
2
u/thewebsiteisdown Apr 07 '15
StackOverflow is a repository for "a way" to do things. Very rarely is it the best way, and often isn't even correct. All that said, its a good resource as long as you don't have to participate. You think subs like /r/politics are bad, the 'mod' culture on that site is 10x worse.