What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

Meta Stack Overflow is great; it gives you a chance to talk about Stack Overflow in a disconnected forum so that you don't have to break the fight club rules of talking about Stack Overflow on Stack Overflow. (http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/cmon-get-meta/)

But what about the cases when you want to talk about Meta Stack Overflow? I would assume that the same rules apply in that you cannot talk about Meta on Meta. So where is a guy to go?

share|improve this question
16  
given a meta-level of n, the statement that discusses it is n+1, and this statement thus generalizes all depths of meta recursively within itself. Its a miracle I just didn't accidenty the universe with infinite meta multiplying by itself infinite numbers of times. –  Kent Fredric Jun 29 '09 at 23:26
2  
What kind of things do you want to talk about? You know you can break some recursion with tail calls - you implicitly replace your current frame with the next frame yielding practically the same level? –  kd304 Jul 13 '09 at 22:21
10  
+1 You just caused a Stack Overflow of Stack Overflows. –  Andrew Grimm Jul 31 '10 at 6:24
    
ok this might not be a serious comment but meta of meta itself will be leading to stackoverflow (never ending :) ). so i guess questions about meta should be there in Stackoverflow... –  Umer Jan 19 '11 at 14:04
    
@Umer: See my answer Jun 29 '09 at 12:58. –  Steve Powell Apr 28 '11 at 14:48
    
Infinite recursion leads to inception.... and stackoverflow –  un5t0ppab13 Oct 30 '12 at 22:14

8 Answers 8

up vote 19 down vote accepted

http://blag.xkcd.com/2008/01/14/robot9000-and-xkcd-signal-attacking-noise-in-chat/

The big problem we ran into, actually, was meta-discussion overwhelming the channel. Every new person wanted to speculate about the rules and their effect, and every violation was followed by a long postmortem. At first, we had a scoreboard showing who was the best at talking without violation, but this quickly turned into a competition, destroying actual chat. When we took down the scoreboard and banished meta-discussion of the channel to #meta-discussion, everything worked out nicely. (And, of course, for discussion of the concept of #meta-discussion people had to go to #meta-meta-discussion, and for chat about how silly that whole idea was, we created #meta-meta-meta-discussion …)

share|improve this answer

"Where do we go to discuss StackOverflow?"

"Meta StackOverflow."

"And to discuss that?"

"Meta meta StackOverflow!"

"...And that?"

"Good god man it's metas all the way down!"

share|improve this answer

meta can be called recursively, yielding meta-meta-meta-meta-meta-....

share|improve this answer
10  
"meta can be called recursively, yielding meta-meta-meta-meta-meta-" Surely that would become a real Stack Overflow after a while :) –  johnc Jun 28 '09 at 22:37
    
Is there a limit on the number of characters a domain (including subdomains) can have? –  uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN Mar 19 '10 at 1:43
    
Offtopic: An example of a long domain name: 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445… –  uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN Mar 19 '10 at 1:43

One meta level in any system is all you ever need for unbounded recursion. e.g., higher-order logic can be used to reason about higher-order-logic constructs as well as first-order logic.

meta.stackoverflow implies meta(.meta)*.stackoverflow

share|improve this answer

Correct me if I'm wrong but there is no rule that you're not allowed to talk about Meta-StackOverflow on StackOverflow?

This would allow meta**(2n+1)-stackoverflow discussion here, and meta**(2n)-stackoverflow discussion on stackoverflow.

Loops are far more efficient than recursion and we avoid stack overflow, too!

share|improve this answer
    
By the way, the highlighting markup (underscores and asterisks) don't work in the dynamic preview the same way as in the post. This is annoying. –  Steve Powell Jun 29 '09 at 13:00
    
It would be off-topic, though. –  Joe Z. Dec 22 '12 at 21:38

Well it's pretty obvious where THAT line of inquiry will go :P

I'd assume that any meta-level is allowed on meta.stackoverflow.com

share|improve this answer

oh, come on -- meta-meta-SO is meta as well, therefore it belongs here as well. :-)

share|improve this answer

When i first came to StackExchange sites, i assumed that http://stackexchange.com is a meta for its every site. I would really want it to be this all-encompassing meta with tags or categories like [ask-ubuntu] and [superuser] to navigate between sites. Currently http://stackexchange.com is useless for me with its "Top questions" from topics i have no idea about like Bible hermeneutics.

That is my solution.

share|improve this answer
    
Have you seen Kevin's excellent answer on Stack Exchange tag filters? Is that what you're looking for? –  Chris Frederick Oct 26 '11 at 15:45
    
Kevin's post is very good, but i meant that there's too many meta sites, which in theory can be united in one stackexchange meta site for greater convenience. –  sindikat Oct 27 '11 at 4:54
    

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .