Return to Answer

I do like that the Stack Overflow team is very open to our feedback, and that's why I am going to post my two cents. It's my personal view and in no way tries to be representative of the whole community.

• I like the idea of Docs as examples first, but as of now it is not clear if that is the official direction. Many posts become endless tutorials, often of very low quality and full of duplication.
• By suggesting that

As Eric Raymond notes, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.”

and this will gradually improve the quality akin to the Wikipedia model is wrong. If there is no **unified direction**, people will just keep adding rather than improving. 

• With the discussion feature, things might get better, yet you will need someone that has time and interest in discussing before actually creating!

• This model unsustainable. Its implementation puts it in competition with official documentations, yet the Stack Overflow team tries to keep alive the idea of examples.

• A community-based knowledge hub can thrive if there is a missing gap, and that was the case of Wikipedia. With official documentation, paid for, scrutinized by experts, uniformly written, there is no space for community-based documentation.

My strong view

My view embeds the points above.

I want to write concise, clear and specialized examples that are not covered by official documentation. I do not want my example to be f***d with overnight, and I do not want to discuss about it before I do it. If you like my example, you will upvote it. If not, nobody will ever see it again. You can comment on it, and I might decide to amend it, but I want full authorship of my examples.

This is why, I will probably stick with Q&A, because I mostly retain the authorship of my answers although I do not decide the topic.

From a Wikipedia point-of-view, if the author is the only one retaining the ownership, how can things improve? Well, by the arguments of large numbers, you will find an author that wanted to contribute with the same example and he might decide to comment on the existing example. The original author might then like the comment and share ownership over the example to allow edits.

People will start having that feel of pride in their contribution, and not the current, "oh geez, why!? it was good yesterday...".

Duplication can be dealt with voted deletions or suggested merges by recognized authors.

I do like that the Stack Overflow team is very open to our feedback, and that's why I am going to post my two cents. It's my personal view and in no way tries to be representative of the whole community.

• I like the idea of Docs as examples first, but as of now it is not clear if that is the official direction. Many posts become endless tutorials, often of very low quality and full of duplication.

• By suggesting that

  As Eric Raymond notes, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.”

  and this will gradually improve the quality akin to the Wikipedia model is wrong. If there is no unified direction, people will just keep adding rather than improving.

• With the discussion feature, things might get better, yet you will need someone that has time and interest in discussing before actually creating!

• This model unsustainable. Its implementation puts it in competition with official documentations, yet the Stack Overflow team tries to keep alive the idea of examples.

• A community-based knowledge hub can thrive if there is a missing gap, and that was the case of Wikipedia. With official documentation, paid for, scrutinized by experts, uniformly written, there is no space for community-based documentation.

My strong view

My view embeds the points above.

I want to write concise, clear and specialized examples that are not covered by official documentation. I do not want my example to be f***d with overnight, and I do not want to discuss about it before I do it. If you like my example, you will upvote it. If not, nobody will ever see it again. You can comment on it, and I might decide to amend it, but I want full authorship of my examples.

This is why, I will probably stick with Q&A, because I mostly retain the authorship of my answers although I do not decide the topic.

From a Wikipedia point-of-view, if the author is the only one retaining the ownership, how can things improve? Well, by the arguments of large numbers, you will find an author that wanted to contribute with the same example and he might decide to comment on the existing example. The original author might then like the comment and share ownership over the example to allow edits.

People will start having that feel of pride in their contribution, and not the current, "oh geez, why!? it was good yesterday...".

Duplication can be dealt with voted deletions or suggested merges by recognized authors.

I do like that the Stack Overflow team is very open to our feedback, and that's why I am going to post my two cents. It's my personal view and in no way tries to be representative of the whole community.

• I like the idea of Docs as examples first, but as of now it is not clear if that is the official direction. Many posts become endless tutorials, often of very low quality and full of duplication.
• By suggesting that

As Eric Raymond notes, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.”

and this will gradually improve the quality akin to the Wikipedia model is wrong. If there is no unified direction, people will just keep adding rather than improving.

• With the discussion feature, things might get better, yet you will need someone that has time and interest in discussing before actually creating!

• This model unsustainable. Its implementation puts it in competition with official documentations, yet the Stack Overflow team tries to keep alive the idea of examples.

• A community-based knowledge hub can thrive if there is a missing gap, and that was the case of Wikipedia. With official documentation, paid for, scrutinized by experts, uniformly written, there is no space for community-based documentation.

My strong view

My view embeds the points above.

I want to write concise, clear and specialized examples that are not covered by official documentation. I do not want my example to be f***d with overnight, and I do not want to discuss about it before I do it. If you like my example, you will upvote it. If not, nobody will ever see it again. You can comment on it, and I might decide to amend it, but I want full authorship of my examples.

This is why, I will probably stick with Q&A, because I mostly retain the authorship of my answers although I do not decide the topic.

From a Wikipedia point-of-view, if the author is the only one retaining the ownership, how can things improve? Well, by the arguments of large numbers, you will find an author that wanted to contribute with the same example and he might decide to comment on the existing example. The original author might then like the comment and share ownership over the example to allow edits.

People will start having that feel of pride in their contribution, and not the current, "oh geez, why!? it was good yesterday...".

Duplication can be dealt with voted deletions or suggested merges by recognized authors.

I do like that the Stack Overflow team is very open to our feedback, and that's why I am going to post my two cents. It's my personal view and in no way tries to be representative of the whole community.

• I like the idea of Docs as examples first, but as of now it is not clear if that is the official direction. Many posts become endless tutorials, often of very low quality and full of duplication.
• By suggesting that

As Eric Raymond notes, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.”

and this will gradually improve the quality akin to the Wikipedia model is wrong. If there is no **unified direction**, people will just keep adding rather than improving. 

• With the discussion feature, things might get better, yet you will need someone that has time and interest in discussing before actually creating!

• This model unsustainable. Its implementation puts it in competition with official documentations, yet the Stack Overflow team tries to keep alive the idea of examples.

• A community-based knowledge hub can thrive if there is a missing gap, and that was the case of Wikipedia. With official documentation, paid for, scrutinized by experts, uniformly written, there is no space for community-based documentation.

My strong view

My view embeds the points above.

I want to write concise, clear and specialized examples that are not covered by official documentation. I do not want my example to be f***d with overnight, and I do not want to discuss about it before I do it. If you like my example, you will upvote it. If not, nobody will ever see it again. You can comment on it, and I might decide to amend it, but I want full authorship of my examples.

This is why, I will probably stick with Q&A, because I mostly retain the authorship of my answers although I do not decide the topic.

From a Wikipedia point-of-view, if the author is the only one retaining the ownership, how can things improve? Well, by the arguments of large numbers, you will find an author that wanted to contribute with the same example and he might decide to comment on the existing example. The original author might then like the comment and share ownership over the example to allow edits.

People will start having that feel of pride in their contribution, and not the current, "oh geez, why!? it was good yesterday...".

Duplication can be dealt with voted deletions or suggested merges by recognized authors.

I do like that the SO team is very open to our feedback and that's why I am gonna post my two cents. It's my personal view and in no way tries to be representative of the whole community.

• I like the idea of Docs as examples first, but as of now it is not clear if that is the official direction. Many posts become endless tutorials, often of very low quality and full of duplication.
• By suggesting that

As Eric Raymond notes, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.”

and this will gradually improve the quality akin to the Wikipedia model is wrong. If there is no unified direction, people will just keep adding rather than improving.

• With the discussion feature, things might get better, yet you will need someone that has time and interest in discussing before actually creating!

• This model unsustainable. It's implementation puts it in competition with official documentations, yet the SO team tries to keep alive the idea of examples.

• A community-based knowledge hub can thrive if there is a missing gap, and that was the case of Wikipedia. With official documentations, paid for, scrutinized by experts, uniformly written, there is no space for community based documentation.

My strong view

My view embeds the points above.

I want to write concise, clear and specialized examples that are not covered by official docs. I do not want my example to be f***d with overnight, and I do not want to discuss about it before I do it. If you like my example, you will upvote it. If not, nobody will ever see it again. You can comment on it, and I might decide to amend it but I want full authorship of my examples.

This is why, I will probably stick with Q&A, because I mostly retain the authorship of my answers although I do not decide the topic.

From a Wikipedia point-of-view, if the author is the only one retaining the ownership, how can things improve? Well, by the arguments of large numbers, you will find an author that wanted to contribute with the same example and he might decide to comment on the existing example. The original author might then like the comment and share ownership over the example to allow edits.

People will start having that feel of pride in their contribution, and not the current, "oh geez, why!? it was good yesterday...".

Duplication can be dealt with voted deletions or suggested merges by recognized authors.

I do like that the Stack Overflow team is very open to our feedback, and that's why I am going to post my two cents. It's my personal view and in no way tries to be representative of the whole community.

• I like the idea of Docs as examples first, but as of now it is not clear if that is the official direction. Many posts become endless tutorials, often of very low quality and full of duplication.
• By suggesting that

As Eric Raymond notes, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.”

and this will gradually improve the quality akin to the Wikipedia model is wrong. If there is no unified direction, people will just keep adding rather than improving.

• With the discussion feature, things might get better, yet you will need someone that has time and interest in discussing before actually creating!

• This model unsustainable. Its implementation puts it in competition with official documentations, yet the Stack Overflow team tries to keep alive the idea of examples.

• A community-based knowledge hub can thrive if there is a missing gap, and that was the case of Wikipedia. With official documentation, paid for, scrutinized by experts, uniformly written, there is no space for community-based documentation.

My strong view

My view embeds the points above.

I want to write concise, clear and specialized examples that are not covered by official documentation. I do not want my example to be f***d with overnight, and I do not want to discuss about it before I do it. If you like my example, you will upvote it. If not, nobody will ever see it again. You can comment on it, and I might decide to amend it, but I want full authorship of my examples.

This is why, I will probably stick with Q&A, because I mostly retain the authorship of my answers although I do not decide the topic.

From a Wikipedia point-of-view, if the author is the only one retaining the ownership, how can things improve? Well, by the arguments of large numbers, you will find an author that wanted to contribute with the same example and he might decide to comment on the existing example. The original author might then like the comment and share ownership over the example to allow edits.

People will start having that feel of pride in their contribution, and not the current, "oh geez, why!? it was good yesterday...".

Duplication can be dealt with voted deletions or suggested merges by recognized authors.