undefined | Better HN

0 pointsantihipocrat7mo ago0 comments

I'm not sure why duplicates were ever considered an issue. For certain subjects (like JS) things evolved so quickly during the height of SO that even a year old answer was outdated.

That and search engines seemed to promote more recent content.. so an old answer sank under the ocean of blog spam

0 comments

ceejayoz7mo ago

SO wanted to avoid being a raw Q&A site in favor of something more like a wiki.

If a year-old answer on a canonical question is now incorrect, you edit it.

PeterStuer7mo ago

But the answer has not become incorrect. It is still correct for that question in that specific context. More likely, the 'canonicalization process' was overly coarse (for SEO?), inconsistent and confused.

MoreQARespect7mo ago

That's a valid goal, but they should have adapted the software to the community instead of trying to adapt the community to the software.

SO's biggest asset was its community and while they treated it with some respect in the beginning they took it for granted and trashed it later.

ceejayoz7mo ago

I think this policy was, in large part, intended to respect the user base, who get exhausted answering the same question over and over.

I do agree they later trashed that relationship with the Monica incident and AI policies.

1 more reply

moi23887mo ago

Then they should have made a wiki instead of a Q&A site

ceejayoz7mo ago

They did, really. That's why I can edit anyone else's questions and answers.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsantihipocrat7mo ago0 comments

I'm not sure why duplicates were ever considered an issue. For certain subjects (like JS) things evolved so quickly during the height of SO that even a year old answer was outdated.

That and search engines seemed to promote more recent content.. so an old answer sank under the ocean of blog spam

0 comments

ceejayoz7mo ago

SO wanted to avoid being a raw Q&A site in favor of something more like a wiki.

If a year-old answer on a canonical question is now incorrect, you edit it.

PeterStuer7mo ago

MoreQARespect7mo ago

That's a valid goal, but they should have adapted the software to the community instead of trying to adapt the community to the software.

SO's biggest asset was its community and while they treated it with some respect in the beginning they took it for granted and trashed it later.

ceejayoz7mo ago

I think this policy was, in large part, intended to respect the user base, who get exhausted answering the same question over and over.

I do agree they later trashed that relationship with the Monica incident and AI policies.

1 more reply

moi23887mo ago

Then they should have made a wiki instead of a Q&A site

ceejayoz7mo ago

They did, really. That's why I can edit anyone else's questions and answers.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse