6 added 1 characters in body
source | link

If you're active on MSO, then you are being heard, and *youryour opinions are, almost by definition, closely aligned with the MSO consensus. In short, you don't see the problem.

If you're active on MSO, then you are being heard, and *your opinions are, almost by definition, closely aligned with the MSO consensus. In short, you don't see the problem.

If you're active on MSO, then you are being heard, and your opinions are, almost by definition, closely aligned with the MSO consensus. In short, you don't see the problem.

5 added 12 characters in body
source | link

But if a question is about programming, if it is possible to give it a high quality and helpful answer, then I don't want it deleted. If people are adding useful information in comments, or calling the correctness of an answer into question, I don't want that deleted. Even if that leads to a comment chain that is long enough to trigger the automatic flagging process.

But if a question is about programming, if it is possible to give it a high quality and helpful answer, then I don't want it deleted. If people are adding useful information, or calling the correctness of an answer into question, I don't want that deleted. Even if that leads to a comment chain that is long enough to trigger the automatic flagging process.

But if a question is about programming, if it is possible to give it a high quality and helpful answer, then I don't want it deleted. If people are adding useful information in comments, or calling the correctness of an answer into question, I don't want that deleted. Even if that leads to a comment chain that is long enough to trigger the automatic flagging process.

4 "silent" contributors -> "non-meta" contributors // because they're silent only on meta, but are valuable contributors at SO
source | link
  • it is irresponsible. Anyone can contact your real-world government too, but few do. And yet, we expect our government to represent us all, and not just the ones who actively participate. Imagine a government which only favored the ones who "participated" (that would basically be members of the government, lobbyists and other interest groups). That just wouldn't fly. So why should it be considered ok on MSO?

  • it is not a question of "fairness", or "how the world works". It is a question of what is best for SO. And it is best for SO to retain everyone who contributes to making the site better. Someone who never visits MSO, but posts high quality answers, is an asset to SO. It is someone that SO should avoid alienating. And so, fair or not, policies which alienate or piss off these "silent""non-meta" contributors, are harmful to SO. Even if MSO members think it's the best idea since sliced bread, it's harmful to SO if it alienates the SO members who aren't on MSO.

  • it is irresponsible. Anyone can contact your real-world government too, but few do. And yet, we expect our government to represent us all, and not just the ones who actively participate. Imagine a government which only favored the ones who "participated" (that would basically be members of the government, lobbyists and other interest groups). That just wouldn't fly. So why should it be considered ok on MSO?

  • it is not a question of "fairness", or "how the world works". It is a question of what is best for SO. And it is best for SO to retain everyone who contributes to making the site better. Someone who never visits MSO, but posts high quality answers, is an asset to SO. It is someone that SO should avoid alienating. And so, fair or not, policies which alienate or piss off these "silent" contributors, are harmful to SO. Even if MSO members think it's the best idea since sliced bread, it's harmful to SO if it alienates the SO members who aren't on MSO.

  • it is irresponsible. Anyone can contact your real-world government too, but few do. And yet, we expect our government to represent us all, and not just the ones who actively participate. Imagine a government which only favored the ones who "participated" (that would basically be members of the government, lobbyists and other interest groups). That just wouldn't fly. So why should it be considered ok on MSO?

  • it is not a question of "fairness", or "how the world works". It is a question of what is best for SO. And it is best for SO to retain everyone who contributes to making the site better. Someone who never visits MSO, but posts high quality answers, is an asset to SO. It is someone that SO should avoid alienating. And so, fair or not, policies which alienate or piss off these "non-meta" contributors, are harmful to SO. Even if MSO members think it's the best idea since sliced bread, it's harmful to SO if it alienates the SO members who aren't on MSO.

3 added 5191 characters in body
source | link
2 added 64 characters in body
source | link
1
source | link