Post History

> As I explained in [this post](https://meta.codidact.com/q/277913) and some community staff confirmed, Codidact is almost a miniature of SE. In fact, I see no *radical* difference between them.

Codidact is being used since not long, that explains the similarities. Even so, there are huge differences below the sea level:

* Codidact is open source, which means you can fix bugs, adapt to your needs as long as complying AGPLv3, you can publish your own instance.

* SE is an aged and dying platform, technologically speaking.

> As we know, almost all (in my opinion, all without exception) people coming to Codidact are already familiar with SE. So, why should we expect that they prefer to contribute to this community, rather than SE? Only because of some meta issues?

They don't have to. Codidact is for communities, not for individual people.

> I know that the main motivation for creating Codidact was some controversy about some meta issues. But, please note that many people, who are interested in contributing to a Q&A community, do not care meta subjects like "Code of Conduct", "Copyright Licenses", firing some community staff, ... .

Well, that's their motivation. Others are here only because open source.

> Even, almost all Codidact community staff are still serious active SE users, and I think almost all [user protestors against some SE policies](https://dearstackexchange.com) will continue their contributions to SE even if they face more unpleasant policies. Why? Because **the main important** thing to almost all contributors is **"asking and answering."**

So what's the question?

> In my opinion, if we want alive communities, we need many people to contribute regularly, especially for some communities like a math community.

Communities can be small and alive. I don't understand.