Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on How does Codidact avoid repeating Stack Exchange's mistakes?

Parent

How does Codidact avoid repeating Stack Exchange's mistakes?

+30
−0

I received an important question in private email, and I'm bringing it here so we can improve on the answer I sent. This won't be the last time we get this question; let's develop a clear, effective response.

The question, slightly paraphrased, was:

How will you prevent Codidact from repeating the problems that got Stack Exchange (SE) into its current state? What, in your opinion, caused SE's problems, and how are you avoiding them?

To elaborate a bit, those problems include:

  • SE management neglecting, ignoring, and then changing things out from under the communities they host and the volunteers who support them (e.g. license changes, policy changes), apparently for financial reasons

  • Lack of transparency and accountability in company actions that affect communities

  • Community turmoil caused by company actions that seem mysterious and harmful, and community fragmentation and decline as some leave, others stay, some change their behavior, and so on

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (6 comments)
Post
+27
−0

You ask an important question. If Codidact just becomes Stack Exchange Inc. version 2 in several years, we've failed our communities and ourselves. We don't want to go down the path that SE took; we all saw where that led. So we're doing some things differently from the start.

First, Codidact is a not-for-profit venture. We will never get our priorities from stockholders or venture capitalists looking to make a profit. The need to greatly increase their profits is a major cause of the changes SE has been making.

Second, the Codidact platform is open-source. We will be running an instance and welcoming a network of communities, but any community that feels we have lost our way, or just has different goals, can leave at any time, taking not only the content but the software as well. Anybody can set up another instance. On SE, in comparison, while people can take the content, the software itself is proprietary -- so you can't just take your community and set it up easily somewhere else, but you need to get new software first. Because SE's business depends on that proprietary software, they will never change that policy. We are open from the start.

Because we're not bound to people seeking a profit, we are free to be much more community-driven than is possible on SE. Different communities have different needs, at both the software and policy level. SE in recent years has been centralizing control, making it harder for communities to do what is best for themselves. Our instance will have some lightweight rules too; for example we don't want to host neo-Nazi groups or 4chan or that sort of things. But everybody who follows our very basic code of conduct is welcome. We're not going to micro-manage communities.

There are never guarantees in life; it's always possible that something bad that I can't currently imagine would happen someday. But we're doing our best to avoid repeating SE's mistakes, and we think being open, accountable, and free gives us our best shot to do right by the communities that join us.

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (2 comments)
General comments
Jordan‭ wrote about 2 years ago

I would be interested to know exactly how SE's for-profit status led to its neglect and lack of transparency. This could affect Codidact's allowed funding models in the future. For example: Wikipedia continually debates whether it should allow ads or optional ads, spin off smaller side projects into semi-profit benefit corporations, or continue to rely only on donations. Would ads lead to the same problems as a for-profit status? Not urgent to consider yet but I would be interested...

Monica Cellio‭ wrote about 2 years ago

@Jordan I'll give this more thought to flesh it out more, but I think the problem with SE's profit model is that it led them to pursue business that bypasses the communities -- they make money by selling private Teams/Enterprise instances or through their jobs business. Aside from SO, which they need to promote Teams or Enterprise, their communities could vanish & not hurt their business. That's not true for Wikipedia (as best I can tell), nor for us. We serve our communities first.