Do you think StackOverflow is toxic?

There is no simple answer, but here are some thoughts:

• Stack Overflow was definitely founded on some highly elitist notions about the nature of software development. I think some things we'd consider to be the most toxic parts of Stack Overflow were really the views of the early project. I went back and listened to some of their really early podcasts, and I've read blog posts of those involved early that give me this feeling. Not that they are not smart people with lots of wisdom, but their view of software development at the time was the foundation for what we have today.
• The delicate balance of Stack Overflow as a resource makes it challenging to change. I think the company is still highly concerned about alienating their power users, so attempts to make things better have to be really really subtle. This is my perception anyway.
• It promotes a "stifling" format in general, IMO. Certain rules are much harsher then they practically need to be. I think this dates to a notion of software development which was way more rooted on notions of absolute correctness than I think are still useful. I don't think this is great for the library that is SO, but also just not great for people's feelings. Getting shut down for a random rule you didn't realize you broke is pretty demoralizing.

I don't fault people who feel that it isn't toxic in their experience, unless they are being completely pigheaded in their assertion. But yes, Stack Overflow is particularly toxic in certain ways.

Nope not really. StackOverflow is a lifesaver for so many developers 😁

I think it depends on how you use it. If you’re just there to demand answers and show no effort to research or share your work, then you may find the community less welcoming. I also notice a lot of folks now delete their questions when they have been answered, which is against the spirit of the site.

Yes, SO is toxic to lazy people that write bad and/or off-topic questions while feeling entitled to have those questions answered by random volunteering strangers.

No, SO is not toxic to people that write good questions that have specific answers and generally try to use the place for the purpose it was created.

More often than not, if you feel SO is toxic, then it's you, not SO, that is the problem.

I would say that it is toxic to bad questions, and I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Most questions on Stackoverflow show very little effort and initiative, and deserve downvotes. I rarely see toxicity when good questions are asked. Just read the question-asking guide, show code, show what you have tried, clearly explain what it did and why that's not what you want. If you can ask a clear question, and demonstrate that you have made sincere attempts to answer it yourself, I think you will have a good experience close to 100% of the time.

I think some platforms have objectively toxic, abusive users, but I don't think StackOverflow is one of them.

Even when I've seen real toxicity, it's the only platform that actually removes flagged content immediately because it isn't constrained by "free expression" or narrow definitions of "hate." It's enough if something is just off-topic or "chit-chat."

However StackOverflow has a very particular set of cultural mores. What might be considered acceptable on another platform is considered rude on StackOverflow, and StackOverflow users will be pretty curt in kind. That's not toxicity; that's just cultural relativism.

I disagree with those who say SO is only "toxic" to the lazy. That's not fair to people who have actually put the work into their issues but still don't yet understand the StackOverflow cultural mores (including proving the effort).

Fortunately, it's gotten better about teaching those norms to new users.

Back in the day it used to be way more toxic that it is right now. I think community has taken many steps to make it more welcoming place for newcomers. The initial hostility towards "newbie" questions could have been rooted in the underlying goal of SO to build a largest knowledge base. Even today, questions revolving around general language/framework/technology-oriented topics, like How do I achieve X in Y or X is giving me some very specific error message. What can I do? are more welcomed than questions specific to a single user issue, like My code doesn't compile or Why do I get exception in this code?.

StackOverflow has rules. Take the time to learn those rules, and then follow them and you won't find the experience toxic. Ignore them, and just post what you feel, and yes, your posts will be treated with disdain. And if you feel that's toxic, then that's how it is.

I am a 9 year S.O. veteran in the top 6% pointwise. The site is toxic because of the negative vote ability.

In the early days any question properly asked was met with a ton of help. I felt more than compelled to give back, spending countless hours finding answers for other people because I benefited from learning new stuff.

But then, an elitist group of moderators began personally attacking people in their replies as well as down votes.

So much so, for me, I never contribute any longer. I just look up answers now and forget it as a training platform.

This works well for me, as I now use other means for learning and use S.O. only for clarification or looking up legacy work.

S.O. died about 10 years ago and became a corporate entity since then.

That's why I'm here at Dev.To.

I do not think StackOverflow itself is toxic.

I think there are a few toxic individuals/contributors on StackOverflow.

Their focus on Q&A format is helpful. Their policy against conversation is stifling, since some topics warrant discussion. I think they could be a better forum if they allowed a better mechanism for open discussion. There current "offline/out-of-band chat" (and hide it away and make it effectively inaccessible) is where conversations go to die.