Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

21
  • 17
    The idea of only considering feedback that is properly formed is quite off putting. I don't have time or the will to put forth the effort to come up with solutions to the problems i see with this site, I have my own projects to complete. That shouldn't diminish the feedback I can provide. Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 19:21
  • 2
    Are you sure about the "hit the reset button on our relationship" bit? For the past decade, that phrase has had some connotations that I suspect don't match your intention. Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 19:22
  • 8
    @KevinB: And yet . . . this is regularly what we demand of askers on our sites. And for good reason. The more roadblocks you place in front of people you are seeking help from, the harder it is them to respond productively. Our professional designers are routinely told they are bad at their jobs. I respectfully submit that's no different than a new user complaining their question wasn't answered. Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 19:36
  • 5
    @KevinB You don't have to lay out full solutions. That's not always even possible from the "outside", as it were. "Justify your feature request" tends to get conflated a bunch here on meta with "explain how you'd solve your problem", but it's by far not a requirement for giving us feedback. Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 21:04
  • 5
    @kevinb I would go one further and say that I don't think coming up with a solution is even important (though it can be nice). I'm most interested in understanding usage scenarios and how they impact you. Put me in your shoes and you can motivate me to come up with a solution. Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 21:17
  • 10
    The approach Joe describes works. I don't always get the design change I want (nor should I expect to), but when I've explained to him what problem I am having, what I have tried to do to solve it, how that failed, and optionally my ideas for how he could solve it, I've gotten good results (most famously with the new top bar). Key to this approach is treating the person you're trying to influence respectfully, like a fellow decent human being who also wants a good outcome for users. Do we disagree on what that looks like? Sure. Can we work together anyway? Yes! Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 22:07
  • 16
    I think one thing that's missing from this equation is that many core users are incredibly frustrated at SE's actions. I have no doubt many people started at respectful, only to be ignored, for years (see Gnat's answer here). At some point, that turns into over the top language to just have someone, anyone listen to their concerns and acknowledge them. While how you say something is important, discounting the core userbase that's been yelling for years because they're not saying it in a way you like just makes it worse. At some point, something has to give. Commented Aug 23, 2018 at 13:08
  • 3
    @fbueckert It's not about what I or anyone else likes. It's about how human communication works. When you operate as Monica described it opens ears/minds. If you show contempt, then it tends to close them. Also, it might be worth realizing the many of the folks on TeamDAG are relatively new to the company. We may have a fresh perspective and an open ear. Commented Aug 23, 2018 at 15:13
  • 15
    I get that contempt invites automatic dismissal. But when you have someone still here, trying to be heard, I believe that has some merit to it; if you're trying to retain your core userbase, then listening to those people, even if you decide not to adopt their ideas, is a good idea. These are the people that still care. It's when silence falls that you know you've lost them. Communication is a two way street, and users expressing frustration and contempt signals that it's breaking down, if not totally broken. Commented Aug 23, 2018 at 15:25
  • 2
    @fbueckert I hear you and really appreciate what you're saying. TeamDAG and our Community team are actively listening. We can't respond to everything (and get other work done) but we really are listening. Sometimes it is hard to hear the signal for the noise. Commented Aug 23, 2018 at 15:36
  • 13
    You realize by making a post like this you are saying "its all you SE users fault". Its a theme I keep seeing in post by the DAG team and not one part of this that admits to faults on DAG's side. If you want us to stop being on the defensive when we answer - stop blaming us. Btw, I have never and will never just put a post out for rep - I don't even care about rep - so its also insulting when you generalize meta users as doing this. Commented Aug 25, 2018 at 15:11
  • 12
    "Uncivil disagreement, which is contempt based, is one in which you're playing to your own audience." That works both ways though. Every reasonable feature request that gets turned down because "our code works that way and we don't want to change it" gives exactly the same vibes. Commented Aug 25, 2018 at 17:53
  • 14
    Are you sure about that? I seem to recall having read a recent meta post or perhaps a comment where the feature was overwhelmingly opposed by the community and the response was "we don't care if you like it or not, we are going to do this anyway", albeit not using the same words, but the meaning is the same. Also, regardless of whether you have personally said this or not, the overall attitude towards user feedback from SE is contempt, when they don't hear what they want to hear. Some have even spoken about "ignoring" meta because their shiny new feature was criticized. Commented Aug 26, 2018 at 8:53
  • 17
    This post is how we (SE users) can give better feedback or edit feedback to make it better for SE. There is nothing in this post on how SE itself will give better feedback to us (even if we do this). You even state that we "show contempt to your team" and we "seem more interested in scoring points" (rep or points, I personally don't care about them and have never posted unless I had something to actually say). Yes, I saw occasionally but when this is the type of response we see, repeatedly, that is blame and it puts us even more on the defensive and loses more trust. Commented Aug 26, 2018 at 14:43
  • 12
    @JoeFriend How long was it between when the "new contributor" banner was announced and it rolling out live? Here's a hint: the announcement had mixed response (58% up, 42% down), highly upvoted "why?" or "it needs work" replies, and other criticism and yet five days later there's evidence of it being live. Sure sounds like "like it or not, we are going to do this anyway" to me. Commented Oct 2, 2018 at 17:48