Uncovering Stack Overflow's TOXICITY

I went undercover to see if I can get a real sense of how toxic Stack Overflow can be. SO is a place where most developers go to get their issues solved, but only a small percentage of them actually post. Let's see why.

#stackoverflow #softwaredevelopment #programming

(Take 15% off any premium NativeScript course by using the coupon code YT2020)

— — — — — — — — —

❤️ SUBSCRIBE TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL 📺

— — — — — — — — —

🏫 FREE COURSES

— — — — — — — — —

📱LET'S CONNECT ON SOCIAL MEDIA

[AZisk]

can someone please help me? i don’t know how to subscribe to this channel.

[insanecuckooman]

no wonder they banned chatgpt, because chatgpt actually tries to answer your questions instead of making fun of you, which makes them look bad.

[Arilith]

Stackoverflow is also so "ironic". I recently received a silver badge for "Notable Question", which I asked 7 years ago! However, when I open the question, it is downvoted into oblivion. However, it still has 3k views, for which SA rewarded me. So in the end I wrote a "good" question, as many people look it up, but it's still downvoted because the mods didn't like it 7 years ago. And most of the people that probably do look it up, don't have enough reputation to even upvote the question.

[TheTuita]

I saw someone mention a strategy once to use Stack Overflow's toxicity against itself. They'd setup two accounts; the first would post the (legitimate) question and the second would be used to answer the question incorrectly. Apparently responses were more motivated to give an answer via pointing out how the "fake answer" was incorrect, versus just answering the original question.

[pneudmatic]

The biggest Stack Overflow problem for me is that if I knew how to ask the question, I'd already know the answer.

[costelinha]

Stack Overflow: "Everyone learns at their own pace and it's ok to make mistakes"

Also Stack Overflow: treats beginners like trash simply for asking questions and trying to learn.

[Adipose]

The worst is when they close your question linking to a similar question, but it was asked years ago in a field that moves rapidly and is rife with security issues.

[KyleAButler]

Nothing drives me more crazy than when I've got a problem, I Google it and find a forum post asking the same question with a whole load of smug unhelpful answers.

[Nahzaka]

One of the worst things is when you google a question, the top result has just 1 response stating "That's a dumb question, just google it." When 99.9% of the remaining results are 5+ years old and no longer relevant, don't have any answers or the answers are just wrong from people having misunderstood the question.

[idk]

I think what advanced devs forget is that, new devs ask question in the way they perceive the problem, so they might word it wrong since they don't know what they are exactly looking for.

[mappingworldbrasil]

One time I saw people on Stack Overflow discussing that the limit of downvote *25* questions *per day* should be removed. That’s the type of people there

[Brug]

My professor once said "there are no stupid questions, beginners at programming are supposed to ask a lot of questions" he answered every single question someone had and he make sure that everyone understand current topic

[futuza]

Stack Overflow is only useful as an archive for previous questions, or perhaps if you legitimately have a CS problem, no one has ever solved before (and you write up a phd dissertation beforehand explaining and proving this), in which case most likely the question will just be ignored since no one wants to work to answer it. The site hasn't really been useful as a Q&A since maybe 2014.

[gunnaryoung]

One time I was rigging a 3D model of a frog and was wondering if anyone had ever done inverse kinematics on limbs with three segments like the back legs of a frog. I found a Stack Overflow post with my very question with only one answer: "you shouldn't be rigging three-segmented limbs in the first place because there's no such thing in nature." Keep in mind I was only there in order to emulate something in nature.

[TheDrugOfTheNation]

I was hesitant to contribute there despite 30 years industry experience. When I saw one reply in my current area that was upvoted but not even syntactically correct, I took the time to learn the code formatter, uploaded the correct version and said the fateful words,

"Shouldn't it be this?".

Two users immediately, simultaneously hid it under the criteria "Don't ask a question in a reply". Either they were bots hoovering up question-marks in replies, or puerile point-scorers. I never tried again.

[DukeOfCurling]

I learned some things today:
- don't let people express themselves through text
- stack overflow is mainly a bunch of repressed people including the staff itself
- chatgpt being emotionless is always there to help you
- do not post question on stack overflow

[vigfhfc]

When I started my coding journey, I used to ask these types of questions and got the same responses from the SO community. It refrained me from asking more questions, which is a crucial part of learning to code. Labeling people as stupid isn't helpful and makes you look like a mean girl. Thank God for ChatGPT. Noobies do not need that toxicity.

[onee]

Sadly it is true. I have seen someone ask quite a basic question the other day. And one of the answers was, "This question is so basic that it shouldn't even be answered." No wonder people think Stack Overflow is so toxic.

[OctagonalSquare]

The worst part is when you google a tech question, SO is usually the first couple results if that question has been asked. But if the question wasn’t asked 10+ years ago, then it’s just going to be downvoted with no actual answers. And you can’t go ask it because they will do the same to you. It’s as if they actively avoid the site being used for its purpose

[noreply]

The thing about Stack Overflow's reputation system is that it rewards writing many answers more than posting actually good and helpful answers.

You can actually get way more "points" for spamming out loads of quick and "flashy" answers that simply _look_ good to random upvoters, instead of actually taking your time, carefully reading questions and offering researched, complete and accurate solutions. I've seen it happen so many times where the answerer clearly didn't understand the question, gave an unrelated, sometimes even wrong answer, and in the end wasn't even questioned because, since they have so much reputation, they must be correct, right? It's so frustrating to watch.

Plus the constant squabbling about how to "improve" the question, making it "more appropriate for the site", instead of actually trying to be constructive and helping the person is just so annoying.