I don't think this has been considered. But this is at least better than a glorified e-mail list manager.
I don't think this has been considered. But this is at least better than a glorified e-mail list manager.
The StackExchange is a family of decentralized individual communities that use a question-answer format. It is a reputation-based system in which privileges escalate as you use the site.
This might be an adequate format for many of G+ communities.
https://stackexchange.com/sites
The StackExchange is a family of decentralized individual communities that use a question-answer format. It is a reputation-based system in which privileges escalate as you use the site.
This might be an adequate format for many of G+ communities.
https://stackexchange.com/sites
Yes, they are great, but only for a certain range of exchange, especially technical questions. G+ has always been very much wider, from nice photos to discussions and opinions.
ReplyDeleteOne cannot just go and host an arbitrary community on Stackoverflow. You will need to show it is popular enough.
ReplyDeleteStack Exchange is a group of question-and-answer sites on defined topics. It cannot be used for any kind of general discussion, posting pictures, etc. It's heavily moderated to keep it to Q&A format. For example, in the cooking community, you can ask a question about how a particular ingredient affects flavor, or how to store a particular kind of vegetable, but you cannot post recipes, discuss the "best" ways to cook meat, etc. And as Dima says, it is difficult to create a new community.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I find Stack Exchange to be the best place on the Internet to find the answers to almost any questions. It's just not a place for discussions.
StackExchange bills itself as a wiki.[1] The focus isn't on discussion, but on building an information archive.
ReplyDeleteThat stated goal is at sufficient odds with site design and user expectations to create significant frictions as it is.
Billing SE as a socialising network is probably inappropriate.
________________________________
Notes:
1. "Stack Overflow ultimately has much more in common with Wikipedia than a discussion forum." Jeff Atwood, "What does Stack Overflow want to be when it grows up?", 22 October 2018.
https://blog.codinghorror.com/what-does-stack-overflow-want-to-be-when-it-grows-up/
Edward Morbius Things are never that black and white. Isn’t Wikipedia part of our “social network”? Have you read the discussion pages in Wikipedia? Aren’t “Wikipedia editors” part of a community of communities?
ReplyDeleteBut Stack Exchange goes further, although the basic format is question/answer. There is plenty of discussion in the comments, if that is not enough discussion you move to the chat channels. And if you need to discuss the discussions you have the meta sites (which are always present as part of the main sites).
The only component missing would be the ability to follow/block specific people instead of just tags.
Edgar Brown Since I elsewhere (#PlexodusWiki) describe Wikis as part of the user-generated / social media spectrum, yes, they are part of the social network.
ReplyDeleteStack Exchange is a bit of a special case in that it by all appearances is a discussion platform, but by design, intent, and moderation is a Wiki and information repository platform.
There's no small amount of conflict generated by the mismatch between surface appearance and design intent/management. Atwood's specific description of the service as a Wiki (that blog article was just published) is new information and clarifies considerable confusion I'd had on the platform for years myself.
It's also a testimony to the importance of aligning intent, design, and UI/UX to avoid such confusion. A problem that's plauged G+ itself.