There is no simple answer, but here are some thoughts:
Stack Overflow was definitely founded on some highly elitist notions about the nature of software development. I think some things we'd consider to be the most toxic parts of Stack Overflow were really the views of the early project. I went back and listened to some of their really early podcasts, and I've read blog posts of those involved early that give me this feeling. Not that they are not smart people with lots of wisdom, but their view of software development at the time was the foundation for what we have today.
The delicate balance of Stack Overflow as a resource makes it challenging to change. I think the company is still highly concerned about alienating their power users, so attempts to make things better have to be really really subtle. This is my perception anyway.
It promotes a "stifling" format in general, IMO. Certain rules are much harsher then they practically need to be. I think this dates to a notion of software development which was way more rooted on notions of absolute correctness than I think are still useful. I don't think this is great for the library that is SO, but also just not great for people's feelings. Getting shut down for a random rule you didn't realize you broke is pretty demoralizing.
I don't fault people who feel that it isn't toxic in their experience, unless they are being completely pigheaded in their assertion. But yes, Stack Overflow is particularly toxic in certain ways.
StackOverflow is still my main source of information (though I use google for browsing it) when it comes to quick questions for daily programming. They have answers for many common problems/things a beginner/intermediate would stumble upon.
I do not hate their rules, because I think at least 1/3 of them are necessary (otherwise the place would be a real war on opinion).
But I do not see StackOverflow competing with e.g. dev.to, because they have different intentions, one providing a solution snippet database, the other gathering valuable opinions of developers.
Some wise words there. But a lot of people would say that StackOverflow has not been concerned enough about alienating their power users, and has gone chasing eyeball quantity at their expense and that of quality in the questions and answers. It probably indicates what a difficult balance they have to strike.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
There is no simple answer, but here are some thoughts:
I don't fault people who feel that it isn't toxic in their experience, unless they are being completely pigheaded in their assertion. But yes, Stack Overflow is particularly toxic in certain ways.
StackOverflow is still my main source of information (though I use google for browsing it) when it comes to quick questions for daily programming. They have answers for many common problems/things a beginner/intermediate would stumble upon.
I do not hate their rules, because I think at least 1/3 of them are necessary (otherwise the place would be a real war on opinion).
But I do not see StackOverflow competing with e.g. dev.to, because they have different intentions, one providing a solution snippet database, the other gathering valuable opinions of developers.
I agree with all of that
there's a stackoverflow rival named 'Grepper' btw.
I use it more than S.o.
Some wise words there. But a lot of people would say that StackOverflow has not been concerned enough about alienating their power users, and has gone chasing eyeball quantity at their expense and that of quality in the questions and answers. It probably indicates what a difficult balance they have to strike.