Why was Stack Overflow forked into https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/ ?
I don't understand this. I think it is stupid ;-)

  • 4
    I think it's great! nuff said. Commented Sep 29, 2010 at 17:09
  • 3
    I agree wholeheartedly... Commented Sep 29, 2010 at 17:24
  • 6
    @Michael With whom?
    – balpha StaffMod
    Commented Sep 29, 2010 at 19:05
  • @balpha -- With @Henrik P. Hessel Commented Sep 29, 2010 at 19:17
  • 3
    Yeah, there are lots of people here that think programmers SE is ineffective.
    – OTZ
    Commented Sep 30, 2010 at 2:35
  • 3
    I agree viscerally, it duplicates a lot of things. The distinction of P.SE vs. SO doesn't make sense to me at all. Looking at the questions asked on P.SE shows me that the users themselves aren't getting it either... Commented Dec 15, 2010 at 19:22
  • 1
    agree. it's stupid.
    – Gordon
    Commented Jan 29, 2012 at 13:59

3 Answers 3


Origin Story

If you browse questions on Meta for a bit, you'll quickly realize that there are a fair number of people who want to use SO for things that SO wasn't designed to be used for: discussions, polls, flame-wars, endless lists... And over time, this has created some amount of irritation on the site: some folks really, really want to, um, participate in questions like,

  • What's the single best way to type code?

  • Do you hurt sometimes (as a programmer)?

  • How can I get a job drawing cartoons featuring the funniest programmer joke about my favorite hidden feature in the worst language ever (on a boat)?

So rather than just stamping them out, like so many ducks putting out flaming elephants, some rose-tint-spectacled user got the idea of proposing a site for all the questions that shouldn't be asked on SO.

Programmers.SE was that site. It began with the tongue-in-cheek proposal Not Programming Related, named after the original term for what became the "Off Topic" close reason on Stack Overflow...

But quickly it became obvious to The Powers That Be that the questions posted to this anarchic paradise of freedom and love were... Not very good questions. They were popular - the site did exceedingly well, right from the start, in terms of participation - but... The idea that this site was destined to become the cesspool of SE didn't sit very well with the goals SE Inc. had in mind for their network.

So something unusual happened... The scope of the site changed, dramatically, during its public beta period.

Subjectively defining "subjective"

Ultimately, the question boiled down to this: how can we create a site that hosts the sort of good, valuable, but never-quite-accepted questions that've lived in an uneasy state of limbo on Stack Overflow since day 1. Not necessarily the "bikeshed" or "GTKY" questions that value participation over all else; honest questions from folks with real problems, questions like,

These are a terrible fit for SO, where they stand in stark contrast to the hosts of mundane or relatively obscure - but objective programming questions. But they're valuable, in that the folks asking them have a real need for the answers. If Programmers was to be something useful, then providing a welcoming host for these questions was a good start: a workable replacement for the doomed meta-tag-ghetto that had once held them on SO.

It's a small step from stuff like this to "What's your favorite programming hat?" though. A system for separating the wheat from the chaff was badly needed... And so we got The Six Subjective Guidelines, which lays out a set of criteria for determining whether or not a given question is appropriate for any site on the SE network.

And in the fires of discussion, the new definition for the site was forged, bearing little resemblance to that original, Pollyannaish proposal. Because Subjective is Serious Business, and this is a site "... for expert programmers who are interested in subjective questions on software development."

Further reading

  • 1
    @Shoq - Are you going to answer number 3? ....... waiting .... Commented Sep 9, 2010 at 23:02
  • 7
    @Peter: I believe it involves trying jQuery...
    – Shog9
    Commented Sep 9, 2010 at 23:03
  • 6
    +1 for Do you hurt sometimes (as a programmer)? I'd answer that question hard.
    – user149432
    Commented Sep 9, 2010 at 23:05
  • 4
    Number three would suck so bad if it weren't for the boat... Commented Sep 9, 2010 at 23:49
  • 4
    "Do you hurt sometimes (as a programmer)?" just made my day. I love the questions that look like somebody typed them out and then realized they were on SO instead of some random other site, so they stuck "(as a programmer)" at the end to magically make it on-topic Commented Sep 10, 2010 at 4:56
  • 3
    The simile “like so many ducks putting out flaming elephants” is… umm, among the more startling concepts I've seen in a long while. Commented Sep 6, 2011 at 12:15

Nothing was forked.

  • StackOverflow is about programming. e.g.: "How to add 2 and 2 with jQuery?"
  • NotProgrammingRelated is about programmers. e.g.: "Why do people want to do everything with jQuery?"
  • 18
    "Try to realize the truth" "What truth?" "There is no fork." Commented Sep 14, 2010 at 12:51
  • -1 not enough jQuery
    – user255942
    Commented Sep 23, 2015 at 19:48

The new site is so subjective questions can be discussed by programmers, or questions that aren't programming related. It's to help keep SO free from that stuff so it can be a clean technical programming Q&A site.

  • 9
    So what you are saying is that Programmers.SE is the skin of evil left behind to free the race of titans from the bonds of destructiveness: youtube.com/watch?v=Ims5W5bJl9s&feature=related#t=11s Commented Sep 10, 2010 at 2:56
  • 1
    @Robert: it need not even be said. Commented Sep 10, 2010 at 4:18
  • 1
    For example I like answering subjective programming-related questions at Stack Overflow. Most of them still get asked and answered there and that trend will probably remain for some time.
    – user151803
    Commented Oct 15, 2010 at 17:54
  • @Saul, I enjoy some of those questions also, but they're not appropriate for Stack Overflow. It dimishes (weakens) it's effectiveness as a Q & A site. Commented Oct 15, 2010 at 18:10
  • 1
    @Lance: I think appropriateness is somewhat subjective. The point is that you can't dismiss a question by citing value opinions and claiming objectivity at the same time; it's inconsistent. From my point of view the effectiveness of Stack Overflow stems from the collective power of the community. Splitting a community splits it's power. Hence regulation should be aimed at creating a balanced unity, not separation.
    – user151803
    Commented Oct 15, 2010 at 18:57
  • I think that Stack Overflow is so big (700,000 daily visits) that is has sort of gain the right to have a subjective place for the community to be, a place to ask things that do not formally belong to SO, but the community is SO big it really needs that kind of place
    – bangoker
    Commented Oct 16, 2010 at 7:34

You must log in to answer this question.

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