Timeline for answer to New site design and philosophy for Stack Overflow: Starting February 24, 2026 at beta.stackoverflow.com by Peter Cordes
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 25 at 12:28 | comment | added | VLAZ | "I'll believe that when I see it. The cynical view on this is it looks like yet another case of pushing half-baked features live, and then not fixing them later. For example we still can't flip questions from the new bad opinion-based format to standard Q&A with answers + comments." IMO, a better example is that we still can't retract <s>votes</s> thumbs on open ended questions. I'd understand an MVP having just "cast vote" no "retract vote". But open ended questions are four months old. And retraction surely isn't as complex to implement as "change type". | |
| Feb 24 at 22:55 | comment | added | Peter Cordes | @KarlKnechtel: And like I wrote in this answer, not fixing anything for months after those glaring errors were pointed out seems like clear malice or disregard for the quality of the site, forcing broken stuff down our throats. Regardless of whether it was malice or incompetence which led to the initial design. (SO staff, I'm sure there are some who weren't knowingly making the site worse, and I don't want to be rude to everyone involved, but this is how I feel we've been treated by SO in general, as an expert in the tags I follow who answers and edits a lot, and knows the canonical dups.) | |
| Feb 24 at 22:34 | comment | added | Peter Cordes | @KarlKnechtel: Exactly. Complete and total misunderstanding what made Stack Overflow into what it was before they started breaking it. I know the saying "never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence", but when the level of incompetence required is so high to explain things, it's hard to not to wonder. (And besides, it's not ok to be that un-knowledgeable about the thing they're developing for. If you literally have only wild guesses, maybe don't change anything until you replace assumptions with facts.) | |
| Feb 24 at 20:36 | comment | added | Karl Knechtel | "But the only selection that results in a normal question is "troubleshooting/debugging", because the people that built it claim they didn't realize that wasn't the only kind of on-topic question on the old SO." Not only is that "not the only kind of on-topic question", it's generally what we don't want. We want people to try to figure out something locally, identify a known unknown, and then ask a question that seeks information (like "why does it work this way?") rather than just assistance. | |
| Feb 24 at 19:05 | history | answered | Peter Cordes | CC BY-SA 4.0 |