-8

Today, I shared an update on progress from last quarter and what we’re up to this quarter on the blog.

Focus areas include;

We welcome your feedback over the next few months as we make progress against the areas above. As always, if you’d like to participate in user research (interviews, unmoderated tests, surveys, etc), we invite you to opt into our user research list by toggling on Research Invitations in your settings.

1
  • 2
    Many thanks for the coding challenges. For the other things ... not sure they are making a positive difference after all. Commented 2 days ago

2 Answers 2

23

We've been trying and failing to get clarity on the stack exchange rebrand.

This is something that affects the smaller network sites and there's compelling reasons to re-examine the rebrand. Considering there's negative feedback from moderators, such as this, and there's acknowledgement that it hurts the community in the earlier announcement

We help run a Network of technical and some very non-technical sites, called Stack Exchange (we’re also legally Stack Exchange, Inc.). Stack Overflow is just one of the sites, but we call ourselves Stack Overflow as a company, and most decisions are developer-focused, often alienating the wider Network.

We'd like to know that our feedback is taken into account and the smaller communities are not getting railroaded into being called Stack Overflow. If it goes ahead as it seems to be, it hurts the smaller communities. Could we stop and re-examine current plans before things get worse?

9
  • 1
    Yes, we will be moving all sites under the Stack Overflow umbrella in the future. We don't have a hard timeline at the moment but we will share that once we do. This is a branding decision that we are moving forward with. We are currently conducting research on what it will look like for all Stack Exchange sites, including Stack Overflow and we are keeping the concerns that communities on sites outside of SO have signaled in mind. We'll present this to Meta when we have more to share. Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    @Des maybe this conversation with Meta should happen earlier rather than later. The arguments the smaller sites are trying to make have a significantly higher risk of being rejected or ignored if you guys are to far deep into your concept. In product development, getting the customers' requirements and desires early in the process is the key to a successful partnership. The earlier you incorporate the end-user's inputs into the thought process, the higher the chance the solution will be a fitting answer to their needs. Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    @Laf Understood and absolutely agree. As I said, there isn't a set timeline yet for the broader network and we are in early research. Research always includes user/customer feedback and understanding their requirements/desires. The primary decision made at this point is to rebrand under Stack Overflow. How that shows up in terms of the product experience is what we need to figure out. Commented 2 days ago
  • @Des Understood, I might have jumped to conclusion with your answer, thanks for the precisions. Hopefully this will be a fruitful experience on both ends. Commented 2 days ago
  • 4
    @Laf Appreciate that and I hope so too! I also want to acknowledge that we understand site identity is one of the biggest concerns and we intend to protect that as much as possible. We'll be sharing our approach early so that we have the space to receive and incorporate your feedback. Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    And yet, it feels like the decision is made, I've had to squeeze blood out of a stone to get an (finally and well appreciated) straight answer (so I can proceed with planning what to do next) - and we've had no alternatives seriously discussed. It has been remarkably hard to get this answer Commented 2 days ago
  • @JourneymanGeek They just don't know themselves how it will look like. The decision to get rid of stack exchange is made, but not what replaces it. You didn't get an answer because nobody knew (or still doesn't know) it. One could argue that maybe a rebranding shouldn't take so long and should only be started if there is not only an idea what to leave out, but also an idea of what to do actually. Stack Exchanges will be called something different than Stack Exchanges, possibly Stack Overflow Public Platform Sites, possibly different. Nobody knows how exactly. And uncertainty is always bad. Commented 2 days ago
  • I think the whole process should be streamlined and take less time. The communities feel kind of unsure about their future brand status and that can only result in some people jumping ship. The delays aren't helping, but it seems they are working on it. Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    If there's no clear plan, then sunsetting a beloved part of the current branding that folks clearly understand is important to the community shouldn't be a done deal. That everything will be stack overflow seems to be the one certain thing, well, other than no one seeming to know what it means Commented 2 days ago
7

I have a couple of issues with the linked blog's "... recap of milestones we hit last quarter, ..." point of

Lowered barriers to comment and vote: Historically, basic actions like commenting and voting were gated by reputation. Unfortunately, gaining reputation ain’t easy—you must first ask or answer and then wait to rack up the points. Rep gates were practical at one point in time to combat spam and bad actors but today, they work against our effort to create a more open and inclusive platform—one where new community members can jump in and contribute value right away.

First, although it's often a slower and more tedious method than asking or answering, one can also first gain reputation by suggesting edits (e.g., just 7 successful ones on a site permits a member to then participate in meta, create wiki posts, post more links, answer protected questions, vote up and flag posts).

Second, the last sentence implies reputation gates no longer work at all to "combat spam and bad actors". However, I believe what it actually means to state is they are still useful, but there are now other means also being used to help deal with those issues, such as the Anti-spam capabilities, which is also explained in the last point in the section there.

I realize these blog posts, due to trying to keep them relatively short and succinct, quite often cannot be complete and fully accurate with everything they describe. Nonetheless, I believe that those two issues I discussed above can be handled without adding very much text, with that change then making the point description reasonably more accurate.

1
  • 2
    Fair points and agreed, thanks for pointing it out Commented 2 days ago

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.