Twitter | Search | |
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @gortok
Interestingly, there is also a proposed general strike as well. The parties considered are: Stack Overflow Community Elected Moderators Stack Overflow curators (SOCVR)
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
There are a number of bots created by users on Stack Overflow that police and draw attention to bad posts. The SOCVR ( close-vote-room) houses these bots. There’s Charcoal, SOBotics, and others. I’m really not sure what they do, tbh.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @gortok
And if I don’t know (and I’ve been a part of this community since its founding) you can be sure SO leadership has no idea they exist or their effect.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
The letter itself is pretty damning and explains why the moderators and curators of feel they need to strike (with receipts):
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
If I had to sum it up, they’re basically asking to start communicating again and to involve the community as a stakeholder in the policy process instead of the recipient.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @gortok
One of the strike organizers mentioned the bots at play and somewhat of what they do: (they’re named by programmers so the names are cutesy and not at all descriptive of what they do)
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
The basic argument against striking is twofold: 1. Even though has done dickish things to its community and hasn’t engaged or listened to its active users or included them in the process, they haven’t technically made it harder to moderate content.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
Honestly this argument sounds exactly like what the victim in an abusive relationship would say. But anyway. The second argument is that they shouldn’t strike because leadership doesn’t even realize they exist, so what would striking accomplish?
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
I have a third argument against striking: when invariably doesn’t meet your conditions (and they won’t) are you prepared to turn all of the bots off and stop moderating and leave entirely? If the answer is yes, then just leave. If it’s no, you’ll show your belly.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
Your bluff will be called and you’ll have to live with the fact that they know your emotional attachment to means they can do whatever they want and you’ll stay around.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker
The only sensible move if you care about is to resign as a community elected moderator and to turn off the bots and stop curating. You are the .015% and they do not care about you.
Reply Retweet Like More
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
. is happy to use your labor to further their aims and to give you nothing in return. If you don’t like it feel free to complain on meta. You know, that place they said they explicitly stopped listening to?
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
Honestly the best thing you can do (though ten years ago would have been better) is to write regularly about so that the internet has something to sink their teeth into. Right now it’s all meta politics that is inscrutable to passersby .
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
. fired/laid off 10/11 people a few weeks back and there was nary a peep on the internet about it. Nothing official from the company and no one wrote about it.
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @gortok
Something something community dies in darkness? (Sorry WaPo)
Reply Retweet Like
George Stocker Feb 12
Replying to @StackOverflow
Incidentally, the actions by leadership mirror Trump’s own disregard for “norms”. The norm was to collaborate with the community, the leadership said “f that” and dared the community to do anything about it.
Reply Retweet Like