Post History

> We know from over 10 years of experience from SE/SO that one of the most common sources of drama, snark, rudeness, escalating arguments, conflicts, users feeling unwelcome, the community getting accused of elitism and so, all originate from comments left as feedback to a potentially bad question.

Yes, disagreement can create all that. But is that the fault of the comment mechanism? Are the escalations caused by disagreement, or the vehicle it was delivered with?

> Humans often simply don’t take kindly even to constructive criticism, especially not when given in public for the world to see.
> 
> The basics of leadership & keeping people motivated is to give praise loudly in public but to give criticism discreetly in private. This makes people far more likely to actually listen to the criticism and change.

I agree that people don't want to lose face, and are therefore more likely to admit potential for improvement in private. 

However, the social environment of a company is markedly different from a community run website. We don't have leaders in control of the financial well being of contributors. In a company, losing face threatens your livelihood. On Codidact, we're losing face in front of strangers whose opinion has little impact on our lives. 

That's why I think that the visibility of feedback on codidact matters little, and thus little could to be gained by moving feedback private. 

However, I fear much would be lost, because public feedback has a number of important advantages:

* it helps prevent redundant feedback
* it improves feedback quality, because people can give feedback on feedback, and see how others give feedback
* it increases the reach of feedback, by showing the feedback to more people, some of which are likely to benefit, too

Overall, this makes giving feedback more efficient, effective, and therefore also less frustrating.

That is not say that we should not try to improve this point of friction. But I fear that privacy will do more harm than help.