Timeline for Modernizing curation: A proposal for The Workshop and The Archive
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 20, 2025 at 11:15 | comment | added | Peter Cordes | But yeah, those questions have much more value that overly-specific debugging questions, and doing more to encourage good questions along those lines would be a good thing. I have seen a couple close votes on some such questions which aren't directly about writing programs (but that's mostly because they were about CPU architecture more than programming, the internals of how CPUs work. Not because they were about conceptual stuff about language design, although we do now have a site for that.) | |
| Dec 20, 2025 at 11:13 | comment | added | Peter Cordes | @Michael0x2a: Explanation questions are already on-topic, with minimal fights about keeping them open. e.g. How does $ work in NASM, exactly? / What happens if you use the 32-bit int 0x80 Linux ABI in 64-bit code? / Why does the x86-64 / AMD64 System V ABI mandate a 16 byte stack alignment? / Why in x86-64 the virtual address are 4 bits shorter than physical (48 bits vs. 52 long)?. But yes, some SO staff seem not to have realized that. | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 16:53 | history | edited | Michael0x2a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Dec 17, 2025 at 15:26 | comment | added | Michael0x2a | 'I think there are ideas here meriting discussion / exploration.' -- IMO the most interesting idea in the post is that there's demand for explanation-type questions. so I'd like to see SO explore this particular direction in more depth. That is, make SO a bigger tent by onboarding and explicitly supporting and encouraging a new category of questions. (And longer-term, keep an eye on staging-ground/workshop for any emerging new categories of questions that'd be worth creating dedicated rails for.) | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 14:34 | comment | added | Michael0x2a | 'I assume curation will largely be the same in this "archive" space, and that if one doesn't want to interact with or see the "workspace" stuff, one doesn't need to' -- Maybe, but both the initial ideas for mechanics and the terms themselves ("archive", "harvest") do strongly imply finality. Taking a step back, it seems 'workshop' is for answerers who enjoy teaching others to write/think/problem-solve with clarity and 'archive' is for those who enjoy curation. But what about people who most enjoy sharing knowledge and expertise? Atm the proposal doesn't really describe a flow for those folks. | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 9:50 | comment | added | l4mpi | Your desire to not "burn time hand-holding users who need help articulating their problem or wade through lower-effort and uninteresting-to-answer questions" is horribly unwelcoming, shame on you! Think of all the lost engagement and of the 1.8 billion dollars some crappy corporation that couldn't care less about you spent on this platform! (sarcasm, obviously, but it really feels like SE does not understand or does not want to understand that most experts have no desire to look at crap questions written by people who struggle to understand the absolute basics of programming...) | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 5:38 | comment | added | starball Mod | I assume curation will largely be the same in this "archive" space, and that if one doesn't want to interact with or see the "workspace" stuff, one doesn't need to. and yeah, I don't think the opinion-based experiment necessarily motivates this proposal, but I think there are ideas here meriting discussion / exploration. | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 5:26 | history | edited | Michael0x2a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Dec 17, 2025 at 5:18 | history | edited | Michael0x2a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Dec 17, 2025 at 4:57 | history | answered | Michael0x2a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |