I took a look at the discussions feature of SO, and it seems like almost all of the new discussions are created by users of less than 100 reputation points. Is this actually true? Do more experienced users prefer to not use discussions? I did see, however, that high-rep users reply to a lot of discussions. Is there a reason for this?
-
44One of the biggest uses for discussions I've seen is low rep users abusing discussions as a place to post their blatantly low quality questions. Without downvotes or a discussion ban system (yet), discussions seems like a more appealing location to ask then the regular Q/A.– FastnlightCommented May 2 at 3:42
-
19The majority of users on the site are 100- rep (94.540 % or 80.332 % if you only consider users with visible posts) you'd expect the vast majority of all content on the site to be by users with 100 or less rep. People who answer questions tend to have higher reputation than those who ask. Providing good questions is much harder of a task. Given this is how the normal Q&A functions I'm not quite sure why it working the same way in Discussions is unexpected.– Henry Ecker ModCommented May 2 at 3:51
-
15I will never use discussions since in my experience they are not used by any user with a positive contribution history. So I would absolutely disagree users with only 100 reputation use Discussions, in my experience, legitimate users rarely use it.– Security HoundCommented May 2 at 4:35
-
1@Fastnlight I really like your choice of terminology there. One of the biggest uses. You didn't do the meta thing and call it a problem. Which is on point because at this juncture we can't be sure that this is not actually the intended purpose of discussions. A place where we have no power to obsessively rulebook people away.– GimbyCommented May 2 at 7:33
-
13They again made the mistake to boot a new place straight into Eternal September mode (that is, without seeding it with high-quality content, so the Eternal September state could at least be postponed). Reddit works much, much better and is a lot more interesting than Stack Overflow Forums.– Peter MortensenCommented May 2 at 15:57
-
2cont ' - Some parts of Reddit are completely overrun by low-quality and uninteresting content, but many parts aren't. Some parts even contain useful content (interesting content is not necessarily useful)– Peter MortensenCommented May 2 at 16:02
-
3There are a fair number of medium and high rep users posting in PHP discussions, but definitely almost all of the discussion starters are low-rep users. There's a lot of people just posting junk and AI responses as well.– miken32Commented May 2 at 21:03
-
15i completely gave up on flagging discussions, and as such haven't really bothered reading them since. I felt like i was just spinning my wheels, so much of it is redundant or pointless and yet being served up to search engines at the same level as questions and answers. it's trash.– Kevin BCommented May 2 at 21:07
-
2@KevinB, I feel the same way...almost all of it is just garbage– s4D_t0yCommented May 2 at 21:13
-
3DiScUsSiOnS? What is that? 🤔 Oh yeah, another of those solutions the company shopped around for a problem to find.– Drew ReeseCommented May 2 at 23:28
-
6"Do more experienced users prefer to not use discussions?" Yes.– TylerHCommented May 3 at 13:39
-
2If there were engaging and useful discussions, sure. But as said - because they crammed it into Stack Overflow, it has become more of a dumping site for "not Q&A stuff". Looking at discussions is just as tiring as looking at a feed of new questions.– GimbyCommented May 3 at 14:08
-
1Given the state of discussions and no signs of improvement or interest in improvement, it feels like eventually they'll just be removed and thus a waste of time to engage in– SayseCommented May 3 at 20:04
-
1@MathiasR.Jessen stackoverflow.com/beta/discussions– UnmitigatedCommented May 3 at 23:50
-
1Wait, Discussions still exist?– user3840170Commented May 4 at 6:58
|
Show 5 more comments
1 Answer
There are a lot of possible contributing factors. Off the top of my head:
There are just not as many high-rep users, and so they don't post as much in total; and when they do post, they're more likely to post answers than questions. After all, people who engage with the site over a long period are more likely to be more experienced people who can answer questions. Of the approximately 24 million non-deleted questions on the site, about 15 million belong to people with at least 100 reputation - but that's not accounting for reputation gained after asking the question, and the site was at its most active something like ten years ago. If we look at only the last week's data, only 30% or so of questions come from users with at least 100 reputation. (And let's be honest here; 100 is not a lot.)
If you're talking about the really high-rep users, generally they got that way by answering questions, and otherwise responding to the reputation incentives created by the site. Discussions don't grant reputation, and represent time not spent on things that would grant reputation. Little wonder that people highly motivated by reputation are not interested.
Another kind of high-rep user is the kind that spends a lot of time on Meta. Discussions aren't popular with this crowd - for many, it represents yet another way the site has lost its way.
Discussions are framed as a place that accept content that the rest of the site wouldn't. Low-rep users are generally new users and they're constantly complaining that the site isn't what they'd like it to be. Their questions get closed and downvoted for not meeting the site's standards and not being aligned with the site's goals. Little wonder they would be interested in participating in something other than asking questions normally.
answered May 2 at 4:02
-
I've a few replies in discussions but haven't started any because I don't have anything to discuss. Or at least not anything that belongs in Discussions.– VLAZCommented May 2 at 8:03
-
8In my experience it's also because for long-term users (not necessarily high-rep) it's harder to switch to the discussions mind-set. Commented May 2 at 8:04
-
13Mine would be: I play by the rules. I don't understand why discussions exist on Stack Overflow, so don't know what is right or wrong to do. Hence I default to posting nothing at all.– GimbyCommented May 2 at 13:15
-
@Cuzy by "normally" I meant that the Q&A is the part of the site where the questions are expected to be questions a priori, whereas a discussion is, well, seeking to discuss something. Commented May 2 at 23:21
-
@GertArnold, disscussions are plagiarised forums from e.g. GitHub or reddit. There they are mandatory instrument, here it's just another option to .. talk. If I have a question, I'd ask a question on StackOverflow. It's winning form of Q&A, why man need something else I yet to understand.– SinatrCommented May 3 at 12:22
-
1Less incentive (rep) to provide high quality content -> less high quality content. If I have a choice, why would I go there?– ChrisBCommented May 3 at 13:52
-
@ChrisB "If I have a choice, why would I go there?" You might be bored, maybe? (Probably you aren't, just as a general comment.) Commented May 3 at 19:50