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*

16
  • By the way, you wouldn't have me bothering you if there were a separate site for people who just want to ask about the SE engine. Think about it! Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 18:13
  • 1
    So you're saying seatbelts shouldn't be the law because they're (supposedly) unpopular? Also, codinghorror.com/blog/2005/05/… is an interesting read. Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 18:31
  • 11
    +1 TL;DR version: how can I trust that I and other members of the community will have a say in new laws? Because right now, I see people who are more involved in StackOverflow than I ever was acting seriously pissed off about this law. And it sure sounds like the people in control of that site are not listening to them. And that scares me. Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 19:13
  • 4
    @gnat if you aren't pissing someone off some of the time, you're not doing anything very useful or interesting. Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 22:24
  • 3
    @Jeff: That sounds like a post hoc ergo propter hoc justification to me. Can you please point me to the place where all of this was discussed beforehand? The closest I could find was this question on "bad titles", but there's not much discussion there. Why ought I trust you? Commented Dec 9, 2011 at 22:45
  • 9
    @Jeff - of course the inverse of your logical proposition—if you are pissing people off, you're doing something interesting or useful—isn't necessarily true. In this case it certainly isn't. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 3:30
  • 2
    @adam the data doesn't support your position. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 4:30
  • 3
    @Jeff - I know you hate pluralization bugs, but it should be the data don't support your position :) But whether this is useful is a value judgement. You're forcing some probably mediocre questions to have slightly better titles, while prohibiting users from asking intelligent ones: halting problem select n + 1 problem NP Complete Problem et cetera, ad infinitum Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 4:36
  • 2
    @Jeff, more importantly, the people I've interacted with on SO are some of the smartest people I've ever "met"; it's hard to believe I've learned so much here. If these people are lining in such numbers to decry this policy, I urge you to exercise some epistemic humility and consider the possibility that you might be wrong Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 4:43
  • 2
    @adam I urge you to look at the data. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 4:56
  • 4
    @Jeff, I've looked at the data. I urge you to consider the possibility that changing 50 mediocre questions here and there to have slightly better titles does not justify limiting what good users can ask on this site. Look at the people who disagree with you. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 5:06
  • 2
    @adam it's logic. youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA also, this "your theoretical restriction of my rights that I will never actually encounter in practice, is absolutely intolerable!" thing gets really old. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 5:13
  • 6
    @Jeff - I never claimed it was my right to post questions with the word problem in it; that's a straw man you made up. The fact that you are choosing to put yourself on the opposing side of many of your most valuable contributors to this site betokens a disappointing degree of epistemic arrogance on your part. At some point a truly rational actor would consider the possibility that maybe some of his underlying assumptions used to analyze the data might be wrong. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 5:31
  • 3
    @adam The data tells me this is a non-issue. The internet is a big place; if things are not to your liking here, perhaps some of the millions of other websites might be? Life is too short to be unhappy. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 5:38
  • 8
    @JeffAtwood if you mean that problem filter is something useful and interesting and that it pissing off someone serves as an indication of that - I agree. I wonder though if you are ready to apply similar reasoning to self? I mean, if say you find out yourself pissed off by guys suggesting to disable the filter for mods / high rep users, would you be ready to consider idea that these guys are doing something useful or interesting? Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 7:38