FWIW, I've found stack overflow to be great. There was a certain class of questions that I used to not be able to find answers to by googling that now I can and it has been very helpful on occasion.
Robby On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Eli Barzilay <[email protected]> wrote: > FWIW, SO is generally doing a good job, for a market that was plagued with > crappy sites like you describe. So it's a decent option for that particular > kind of interactions. The feature of suggesting existing answers based on > your question can work pretty well, and it looks like it deals well with > scalability issues -- both the technical aspects and the social ones (by > giving experienced users moderation power). Advertising isn't too bad > either (not that I see any of it though...). > > On Apr 11, 2012 4:14 PM, "Neil Van Dyke" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Two opinions: >> >> 1. Going to StackOverflow.com to talk about Racket is like moving to >> Topeka to break into Hollywood acting. >> >> 2. One of the StackOverflow comments mentioned searchability of forums. >> One of my pet peeves is all these sites that archive email lists and/or bug >> lists (often only so that they can sell ads), so that a Google search on a >> question gives you numerous hits for the same content, just in different >> fonts, and you have to wade through many such duplicates. This happens with >> lots of GNU/Linux topics, and nowadays it happens for Racket, too. >> >> Neil V. >> >> -- >> http://www.neilvandyke.org/ >> ____________________ >> Racket Users list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
