Timeline for Firing Community Managers: Stack Exchange is not interested in cooperating with the community, is it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 5, 2020 at 21:55 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @Beefster SO had resignations (Robert Harvey, Ed Cotrell, George Stocker, Madara Uchiha, ..). See meta.stackoverflow.com/… | |
| Feb 5, 2020 at 21:20 | comment | added | Beefster | @Trilarion I can imagine that investors might see most of the nearly 200 communities as dead weight that takes more effort to keep alive than the revenue they generate. SO hasn't had any moderator resignations (to my knowledge), so it's pretty clear that SO and most of the other communities are completely separate communities at this point. Maybe SE is deliberately giving their middle finger at this point so they can have an excuse to shut down the other communities. | |
| Feb 5, 2020 at 21:15 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @Beefster That would be fine by me, if they would wait with shutting down all but the programming exchanges until an alternative platform is ready to take over. But so far I would not see it as very likely. They also get ad revenue from the exchanges. It's not clear if it really would save them a lot of money. | |
| Feb 5, 2020 at 21:13 | comment | added | Beefster | All this makes me wonder if SE, Inc. has plans to shut down everything but StackOverflow and SuperUser... It would certainly save them a lot of money. | |
| Jan 20, 2020 at 21:41 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @PeterMortensen And more ideas are incoming: For example could questions that come from newly registers user, be on automatic hold, until they are cleared. Likely they are duplicates or debugging help questions with insufficient information. Being on hold initially would allow them to become a good question first before people try answering them. This could also be done already on SO of course. | |
| Jan 19, 2020 at 8:39 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @PeterMortensen Mostly I felt like a decoupling of the public Q&A from other activities like selling the software would give it more focus. In the end the public Q&A is just one more customer of the Teams software with a particularly large team. Even for the company it could make sense to split that part off and give it more autonomy. | |
| Jan 19, 2020 at 7:59 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @PeterMortensen The new place could more clearly define what the mission is. This place here changed the mission to free tutoring for everyone but didn't say it as clearly as possible. The new place should be more community driven in a sense that requested features become implemented quicker. And it should allow the migration of the platform quicker. More competition or even just the possibility of it are what keeps the platforms from becoming entrenched. I could imagine a small service company running an open source platform and the content CC-SA even maybe without attribution required. | |
| Jan 18, 2020 at 20:27 | comment | added | This_is_NOT_a_forum | But how will a new place handle the inevitable Eternal September event (if it becomes popular). Wouldn't the same mistakes be repeated all over again (e.g. by not changing the software in any significant way (too entrenched) when it happens) - not extending it or manage user expectations? | |
| Jan 16, 2020 at 7:52 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @jscs One year before I would have thought it crazy but now I'm ready to go. I feel a bit like the company mobbed the community until it leaves. But that is not mature behavior, they could just have said so in an open manner. It took a while but I'm ready to go. | |
| Jan 15, 2020 at 23:13 | comment | added | jscs | Cf. Is it time for Stack Exchange Inc and the community to legally separate amicably? | Is it time to decentralize? | |
| Jan 15, 2020 at 22:27 | history | answered | NoDataDumpNoContribution | CC BY-SA 4.0 |