Skip to main content
replaced http://stackapps.com/ with https://stackapps.com/
Source Link

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yethasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulationongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator interventionwarrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tipdev-tip posts to be reputation farmingto be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?


George Edison: I have set up a small MediaWiki installation here:

http://stackoverflow.quickmediasolutions.com/wiki/

Feel free to add / edit pages to document API usage. All the content on the site is CC licensed so you can copy (with attribution of course) the stuff in the existing dev-tip questions.

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?


George Edison: I have set up a small MediaWiki installation here:

http://stackoverflow.quickmediasolutions.com/wiki/

Feel free to add / edit pages to document API usage. All the content on the site is CC licensed so you can copy (with attribution of course) the stuff in the existing dev-tip questions.

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?


George Edison: I have set up a small MediaWiki installation here:

http://stackoverflow.quickmediasolutions.com/wiki/

Feel free to add / edit pages to document API usage. All the content on the site is CC licensed so you can copy (with attribution of course) the stuff in the existing dev-tip questions.

added 195 characters in body; added 135 characters in body
Source Link
Nathan Osman
  • 23.3k
  • 11
  • 61
  • 107

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?


George Edison: I have set up a small MediaWiki installation here:

http://stackoverflow.quickmediasolutions.com/wiki/

Feel free to add / edit pages to document API usage. All the content on the site is CC licensed so you can copy (with attribution of course) the stuff in the existing dev-tip questions.

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?


George Edison: I have set up a small MediaWiki installation here:

http://stackoverflow.quickmediasolutions.com/wiki/

Feel free to add / edit pages to document API usage. All the content on the site is CC licensed so you can copy (with attribution of course) the stuff in the existing dev-tip questions.

Added an update regarding Kevins somewhat off-topic answer.; deleted 7 characters in body; added 8 characters in body
Source Link
Steffen Opel
  • 1.4k
  • 8
  • 14

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?

Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?

Update:

Kevin provided an answer, which, while adding something of value to the three related questions together (by naming the originating concern eventually), actually does not apply to the question at hand. So to further stress the issue I'd like to provide an alternate phrasing with his response in mind:

Is it really worth to police something prematurely, which hasn't been identified to be a problem yet, for the sake of the policy itself, thereby sacrificing the upmost motivation to improve API/library documentation (as well as the liberal ongoing community self-regulation regarding the exploration of proper API/library documentation)?


Assuming for a moment that their really might be an argument important enough to warrant moderator intervention to consider dev-tip posts to be reputation farming at some point in the future and require them to be community wiki therefore immediately, would it really be worth to discourage substantive illustrative guidance of API/library usage nowadays already for the sake of a couple of reputation points in a distant future?

edited tags
Link
Kevin Montrose
  • 18.7k
  • 6
  • 35
  • 62
Loading
edited tags
Link
Steffen Opel
  • 1.4k
  • 8
  • 14
Loading
edited title
Link
Steffen Opel
  • 1.4k
  • 8
  • 14
Loading
Source Link
Steffen Opel
  • 1.4k
  • 8
  • 14
Loading