24
$\begingroup$

This question is a bit of an open discussion and on the edge of off-topic too broad, but I place it anyway since it is about an interresting development (and people may change/improve the question to be more clear)

There are two platforms rising up. https://topanswers.xyz and https://codidact.org/. These platforms may be viable options for the near future to have a Q&A platform where people can ask and answer questions about statistics on an independent platform.

I personally would like to move my activity over there and I imagine several others may as well.

Could we anticipate a bit, and mainly generate ideas, how we can shape a potential collaboration between the communities on the different websites (which in reality will be just one single community)? For instance, in order avoid such things as a lot of duplicated content on the internet and an internet that is difficult to navigate.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 15
    $\begingroup$ I was happily diffident about joining SE until I realised it was a big deal and going strong. Now I am unhappily diffident about leaving SE until everyone of note does so too. I have a lot of sunk capital here, starting with emotional capital and genuine admiration and regard for many key people here, most of whom I have never met and will never meet. I don't care two hoots about the company as such; its goals are not mine beyond providing the site. Yes, I do know that this kind of modified loyalty is what the company is banking upon, but there you go. So, I will watch these places. $\endgroup$
    – Nick Cox
    Commented Feb 4, 2020 at 18:24
  • 15
    $\begingroup$ Both Codidact and TopAnswers would be happy to discuss your needs with you if you are interested. $\endgroup$
    – Monica Cellio
    Commented Feb 4, 2020 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ @NickCox there is indeed a lot of work on the website here. A possible solution might be to copy the content (or some of it), but it will split up the 'discussion/development/answers' that may continue uncoordinated on parallel sites. We already have this on the Stack Exchange platform with the slightly related sites, but it will be worse when a site has the exact same topic. $\endgroup$
    – Sextus Empiricus
    Commented Feb 5, 2020 at 8:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There is a simple but big question I don't know the answer to: namely who has any rights here? For myself, I have no objection to anybody copying any answers or comments I gave to other sites so long as they remain intact. $\endgroup$
    – Nick Cox
    Commented Feb 5, 2020 at 18:29
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The part "so long as they remain intact" is difficult. The current license currently means that anybody can copy and republish (but also edit) the contributions (as long as there is attribution, including the name of the original author with a link to the user SE profile, and a copy of the license). Now there are also author rights but they are difficult; it means that you can control where and how any of your contributions (which remain your property and the license doesn't change that) are being used... within reasonable terms. $\endgroup$
    – Sextus Empiricus
    Commented Feb 5, 2020 at 19:15
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ My two cents: I loved participating here but got thoroughly sick of SE's behaviour and silently stopped participating when things blew up a few months ago; I now just check in once in a way. So I'd be happy to start afresh on a new site, though I know the barriers are substantial (network effects in particular). $\endgroup$
    – mkt
    Commented Feb 6, 2020 at 9:06

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
8
$\begingroup$

Here's a bump to this thread: Codidact now has a Math.Codidact site, with scope

General Q&A about all branches of theoretical and applied mathematics, including closely-adjacent sciences where the central question is about the math.

This seems to have a certain overlap with CrossValidated, though a lot of our content here would apparently be off-topic there. It might be interesting at some point in time to create a statistics site there. But as others have written here, the network effects of 167,766 questions at CV are strong...

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

Create a general landing page for statistics questions.

We could create a statistics landing page where all sites, for instance also datascience.SE, could join together in a single same spot. This is a bit more complicated than a simple idea of collaboration, and takes time to develop.

This idea is that we should be able to do like 'big data' and gather everything, or most, on the internet together like a metasearchengine, e.g. also small sites like Andrew Gelman's blog https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/ or Edward Tufte's blog https://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a?topic_id=1

Example of the need for this.. just search https://stackexchange.com/search?q=ridge+regression and you notice a lot of misplaced questions on some topics in statistics, people do not get in the right place to ask and answer.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 11
    $\begingroup$ " people do not get in the right place to ask and answer ": this is going to happen on any site. Every forum I know has a long tail of people who are confused or desperate or clueless or lazy, or some combination. $\endgroup$
    – Nick Cox
    Commented Feb 5, 2020 at 9:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @NickCox I agree with you. This answer is more like a small brainwave (not an answer/solution to the question) where I also see lots of objections. But, I hope to see and get more of these sort of ideas. $\endgroup$
    – Sextus Empiricus
    Commented Feb 5, 2020 at 9:30
  • $\begingroup$ I think this idea has a lot of potential. But could it be too unwieldy in practice? I wonder if it would really be better than doing an internet search. $\endgroup$
    – Earlien
    Commented Feb 14, 2020 at 1:42
5
$\begingroup$

I am so glad @SextusEmpiricus asked this question, and I have been visiting both sites before this question was posted. That said:

Top Answers' Code of Conduct is "Be nice." which seems ripe for abuse, and ripe for implicit biases to manifest.

If Codidact has a Code of Conduct, it is not immediately visible.

For all SO/SE's execrably poor decision making over the past five months, they are actually making an attempt to implement an inclusive environment via a Code of Conduct. I won't be participating in either alternative site without similar work foregrounded to all visitors.

$\endgroup$
7
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ See forum.codidact.org/t/proposed-code-of-conduct/462. $\endgroup$
    – Scortchi Mod
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 17:35
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ FWIW, I think "be nice" is a perfectly fine policy. It just needs to be clear that referring to people in a way they don't like is not nice. $\endgroup$
    – gung - Reinstate Monica Mod
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 17:41
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Better link: github.com/codidact/core/wiki/Codidact-Code-of-Conduct $\endgroup$
    – Monica Cellio
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 18:32
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Every forum seems to start with the idea that the essence of good behaviour can be stated concisely. That's correct -- until you need protocol for dealing with unclear, confused or off-topic questions; or until you need protocol for when being nice to those who are being nasty doesn't work. For all its limitations a merit of SE is an intricate set of procedures for questions which aren't that good in some sense, from technically to in human terms. I see other places where clueless questions and poor behaviour generally are often indulged, and that has downsides as well as upsides. $\endgroup$
    – Nick Cox
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 18:57
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Note also that there wouldn't appear to be any obstacle to our augmenting the Codidact Code of Conduct for our site if we wished to. $\endgroup$
    – Scortchi Mod
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 19:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @gung-ReinstateMonica I have seen transphobia, queer-phobia, and sexism expressed in communities with similar policies, and find value in express and explicit language around inclusion and anti-harassment. $\endgroup$
    – Alexis
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 20:45
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @MonicaCellio Thank you (and @Scortchi-ReinstateMonica) for the links. $\endgroup$
    – Alexis
    Commented Feb 7, 2020 at 20:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .