I was looking at the available options for creating a new Stack, and it occurred to me that I didn't see a certain option. Is it possible to create and run one's own public stack and keep control of it (i.e. I would be the chief moderator, I (not the community) would decide what is on-topic and what is off-topic, I would have the final say on who should be banned, etc.)?

I was able to find the following, but none of them seem to match:

  • SO Enterprise - the information from @RobertCartaino implies that SO Enterprise is a private service when he says "If you prefer a more public-facing site, we have 150+ sites...."

  • Stack Overflow for Teams - the SO for teams tag wiki on Meta.SO states that it is "for organizations where they can use the Stack Overflow format and infrastructure for a closed community" (my emphasis).

  • Proposing a new site on Area 51 - this seems to have the potential for allowing one to create a new site, but it doesn't guarantee that the creator will maintain control.

The first two products seem to support the idea of keeping control - that if I am the one paying, then I get to make the decisions, but not the idea of granting public access. The third product/option supports public access, but does not guarantee control (e.g. I have no guarantee that I will become a diamond mod on the site I propose, or that I can prevent scope drift or force my own scope drift onto the site).

So, is there a product available from SE that would allow someone to create and run their own public-facing stack, one that is open to the general public, but is subject to the benevolent (or not) overlordship of the one paying for the stack? Am I incorrect in understanding that a SO Enterprise and/or a SO for Teams setup must only be accessible to internal users, and that a server or team owner may allow members of the public to create accounts and/or post if the owner chooses to permit this?

The most obvious use case for such a product would obviously be to provide support for my own product(s) (e.g. "Ask Joe's Restaurant" or "Ask Spacely Sprockets"), but there could be others as well. Perhaps I am a religious leader and I want to provide a public space for people to ask doctrinal questions, confess sins, and seek divine intervention, but retain the right to ban anyone that I feel offends my god(s) or is attempting to dissuade my followers, even if they have not done anything that would normally merit derogatory account action on a regular, public stack.

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .