I’m a bit fed up with these deletionists. Stack Overflow is rapidly devolving into Wikipedia in this regard.
With one key difference: the deletionists on Wikipedia actually have one argument in their favour: who’s going to maintain irrelevant articles?
In contrast, maintainability just isn’t an issue on Stack Overflow.
“just noise?” My *ss. Stack Overflow isn’t a text you read from start to finish. First and foremost, it’s a search engine for answers. How then can individual questions be noise, unless they clutter search results?
It’s out of the question that these discussions do provide valuable answers. The onus is on the deletionists to prove that they are detrimental to the usability of Stack Overflow.
Rules are guidelines, not dogmas, and neither Jeff nor Joel could foresee any potential use of Stack Overflow, so why use their rules to justify ridiculous actions?
To repeat, I am
a bit completely fed up with the deletionists’ attitude. It’s creating a lot of work for the rest of us, to save valuable content from closing and deletion. A bit more of a live and let live attitude would help a lot.
I’m also dismayed by the quibbling some users indulge in: just because many of the answers are not technically “hidden” features is no argument against the questions.