Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

20
  • 15
    There needs to be more 🤢, 🤮, 😠, and 😡, but yes. Misleading ads are awful. Commented Dec 8, 2025 at 17:51
  • 70
    Yes. Not being deceived by ads is one of the draws of these sites. Commented Dec 8, 2025 at 17:52
  • 2
    The ads have a logo, but I don't think that's sufficient. Maybe a different background tint would help, although that has to be done carefully or the text can become unreadable to those with colour vision difficulties. Commented Dec 8, 2025 at 18:05
  • 35
    I think the tags are the thing I hate the most. They act like camouflage, helping the ads blend in. Commented Dec 8, 2025 at 18:06
  • 11
    To Stack Exchange, the fact that they are misleading, is a feature, not a bug. Commented Dec 9, 2025 at 3:58
  • @RobbyCornelissen to SE the ads are money, for the advertisers the fact that they are misleading is good marketing, not a bug. Commented Dec 9, 2025 at 10:01
  • 12
    And that's kind of a thing here. We got asked for feedback, the feedback was acknowledged - then the company didn't follow the feedback, making things worse rather than better. So, what's the value of our feedback? Commented Dec 9, 2025 at 11:03
  • 4
    "Due to the unique way in which Stack Teams works (which hosts the moderator teams content), any questions that are edited do not get bumped to the top - every question is ordered by the date of creation, not modification." – Minor note: You can change the sort of the Questions list from Newest to Active (or Bountied, Unanswered, etc.), just like you can on regular SE network sites – and it does remember whatever sort option you last selected, just as on the SE network – but the default sort is Newest, as you describe. Commented Dec 9, 2025 at 15:55
  • 6
    @Snow Definitely done in good faith. My apologies to the mods, I had assumed the lack of additional feedback meant the mods felt that the logo being moved to the left side of the post instead of the right was clear enough. That's on me. I've been (and still am) in the process of gathering the feedback to all of this and passing it on. Commented Dec 9, 2025 at 16:44
  • 8
    @Dalmarus no blame intended here, and thank you for listening to the feedback. Commented Dec 9, 2025 at 16:46
  • 1
    @Dalmarus Does the "Done in good faith" also cover the "They told us that the shading was too light, wasn't clear enough and needed to be darker so we removed it instead making it even worse"? Sorry, based on Snow post I don't thing there was much good faith when handling those concerns. Not only did the company do nothing to improve the issues that were pointed out, it even go the extra mile to worsen them . Commented Dec 12, 2025 at 12:40
  • 1
    @ꓢPArcheon From what I can see, the design team opted to move the advert logo to the left to make it more obvious that it's an advert. With this done, they decided that the background shading was no longer needed, so it was removed. Personally, moving the logo made the advert look more like the surrounding content and less like an advert. It would be pretty good if I could include the previous version of the mock-up in my answer (or the source question) so that the differences could be seen by everyone. I doubt I'd be allowed to share that image though. Commented Dec 12, 2025 at 14:05
  • 6
    @Snow “the design team opted to move the advert logo to the left to make it more obvious that it's an advert. With this done, they decided that the background shading was no longer needed, so it was removed” — Since the logo move quite unambiguously made it less obvious that it’s an ad, this feels very much like a kind of ex post facto rationalisation that I cannot find any way to describe as being ‘in good faith’ on their part. If the design team cares about accessibility and UX, neither of those changes will have been their choice to begin with. Commented Dec 15, 2025 at 16:12
  • 5
    Either that, or the design team were directly told by the brass that they had to make it look more like regular content, and they opted to keep their jobs rather than push back too much… Commented Dec 15, 2025 at 23:02
  • 1
    With English being read left to right, that's why the team felt it made the ad more obvious than leaving it on the left, along with it replacing the spot where vote counts/options would normally be. Commented Dec 16, 2025 at 19:57