re: What a very bad day at work taught me about building Stack Overflow’s community VIEW POST

FULL DISCUSSION
 

Thanks for posting this. This feels like exactly the right line of thinking.

I'll add another factor to the list -- I hate it when other people edit my answer. I've had to revert edits a couple of times because the edit changed the meaning of my answer. It feels like incentivizing edits with rep leads to over-editing. And having your own words/code changed also feels like a knock. Perhaps answer editing should be opt-in/out? "Yes, let someone edit my answer for clarity."?

I wanted to specifically mention the Software Engineering site as one that I have found especially brutal. General engineering questions are frequently not about "the right answer" (because there isn't one right answer), but instead about weighing options and their trade-offs. Because of the QA format inherited from SO, asking about options and their trade-offs is usually considered "too broad". I have seen a lot of good, answerable questions get closed. And I've gotten scolded in the past for answering anyway. It seems like it needs to be a different format from the other sites.

 

I have a couple of answers that I’ve had to revert multiple times because they’re about a nuanced, no longer well documented topic. Every time it gets edited it gets “fixed” by well meaning users reading documents for a different version, and they make my answers downright wrong. I don’t mind people improving my answers, but screwing them up without notifying me wears on me.

code of conduct - report abuse