• xtapa@feddit.deEnglish
          335·
          1 year ago

          Ah, the prime example of a stack overflow user. Nice.

            • rmam@programming.devEnglish
              22·
              1 year ago

              There is not much dignity in belittling others in a desperate attempt to compensate for something.

              If you don’t want to help others then that’s ok. Move on. Just don’t try to pretend you want to help.

                • rmam@programming.devEnglish
                  11·
                  1 year ago

                  The real question is does belittling people in Stack overflow helps you compensate for something? Because that’s supposedly a venue where people help each other, but you’re just there to dump your frustrations on newbies.

          • tiredOfFascists@reddthat.comEnglish
            115·
            1 year ago

            The prime example of a SO user is being intentionally obtuse, demanding more detail even if the typical programmer would have a pretty clear picture of what is being asked. So yeah, projection much?

        • Comment105@lemm.eeEnglish
          7·
          1 year ago

          Oh, thank you. Your use of reduplication helped my smooth brain process your comment properly.

        • rmam@programming.devEnglish
          23·
          1 year ago

          That doesn’t clarify anything at all, and in fact reflects a desire do denigrate people for asking honest questions.

            • rmam@programming.devEnglish
              25·
              1 year ago

              How about this. SO is a conglomerate of volunteering peers, who do not work for you (…)

              And that’s fine. Ignore the question and move on with your life.

              As you’ve said, you are only a volunteer. You don’t own the service nor do you get to dictate what other people’s doubts are worthy or not. If you want to help others them share whatever you can share. Otherwise go find a better use of your time without getting in the way of every other volunteer.

              It is not a tutorial site, a help desk, or a source of free labor. It’s denigrating to treat it that way.

              Stack Overflow states quite clearly in its home page that it is “A community-based space to find and contribute answers to technical challenges”.

              Call it “help desk” or whatever. Stack Overflow is by design a place to ask questions to technical challenges.

              You do not get to dictate what other people find challenging. You do not get to abuse services to abuse people by denigrating them.

              • shagie@programming.devEnglish
                2·
                1 year ago

                https://stackoverflow.com/tour

                With your help, we’re working together to build a library of detailed, high-quality answers to every question about programming.

                There’s a call out to quality of answers… which has implications for the quality of the questions.

                Focus on questions about an actual problem you have faced. Include details about what you have tried and exactly what you are trying to do.

                Make note of the use “exactly what you are trying to do”. When people are asking about what are you trying to do and the nature of the question… that’s part of it.

                Not all questions work well in our format. Avoid questions that are primarily opinion-based, or that are likely to generate discussion rather than answers.

                Not everything is suited for the Q&A format that Stack Overflow uses. It isn’t a help desk - it’s a Q&A site that is trying to build a repository of information.

                Further reading: https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/

                In March 2010, we rebalanced our reputation system to favor answers. While we value good questions (and asking a great question is absolutely an art), we want to explicitly encourage people to provide the best possible answers. Without people interested in providing good answers, the questions are moot. We know that answers have more intrinsic…

                …

                That’s why we’re determined to keep question quality high, even at the cost of refusing a little sand. It’s true that you can’t have Q&A; without questions, but having the wrong sorts of questions is far more dangerous. The fastest way to kill any Q&A; site is to flood it with low-quality questions. I think Mark Trapp summed it up best in this meta answer:

                And an announcement of Stack Overflow: https://blog.codinghorror.com/introducing-stackoverflow-com/

                It is by programmers, for programmers, with the ultimate intent of collectively increasing the sum total of good programming knowledge in the world. No matter what programming language you use, or what operating system you call home. Better programming is our goal.

                The emphasis on “good” is in the original too.

                It may be that your question isn’t one that fits the site format well. That should be ok - there are many other places to ask questions. Stack Overflow is poorly designed for many types of questions in an effort to optimize its utility for being a repository of knowledge for people to search and find answers without having to ever ask a question.

        • rmam@programming.devEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          Most questions can be answered by RTFM. That does not automatically mean the questions should not be asked.

          Proponents of RTFM seem to believe all manuals are written well, when that’s the exception and not the norm.

          If all you have to say is RTFM, everyone would be better off if you sat out the question and let others chime in. The overall posture reeks of ladder pulling.