Hot answers tagged


The original proposal seemed to be to hold the AMA itself on meta, which isn't what meta is for. If there is an AMA, it should be on chat. I also note that the AMA on Physics seems to have run monthly but then had a hiatus of several months. Physics is a rather larger community than ours (they have 133 users who've earnt 100+ reputation so far this month; ...


The SE platform is not a good fit for Meta SE. Nearly every feature has been proposed before (but these posts can be hard to find) and repostings are usually immediately closed as duplicate. The fact that situations, requirements and policies change (in particular from the Time Before SE 2.0 to now) is often ignored. Also, SE prouds itself by disabling ...


I tried participating on Meta Stack Overflow and got downvoted into oblivion. I'm not going back there. I hope Meta Stack Exchange will be different.


I've sometimes tried to find stuff on Meta Stack Overflow, but there's too much content that's irrelevant to me. Splitting the sites will be good, as the new site will largely have only content that's relevant to everyone.


Interesting proposal, but I don't think an AMA is the best format for this site. The 'M' part is the part that I think doesn't really fit, why should the focus be on only one person? Couldn't other experts also have good or even better answers to your questions? If you want to know something related to that person in particular, you can simply use the chat ...


I think there's seems to be some confusion or misunderstanding. You're not being prevented from submitting a proposed community promotion ad. In fact, you did submit such an ad, and it is up and available for voting. You haven't been prevented at all. As far as your complaints that Raphael has not let you post such an ad: those complaints seem ...


We're not really sure why it wasn't turned on for Meta - it should have been enabled here when it was enabled on main. It's enabled now. :)


Meta has question closure and tag wikis like anywhere else. Why would we turn the queues off here?


Meta sites just use the SE software (with some modifications), for better or worse. So it figures there'd be a review queue. I agree that they could be turned off here. They are probably necessary on sites with more Meta volume, though. meta.SO, for instance, has more traffic than our main site.


I look at Meta Stack Overflow sometimes. I just ignore the content that's specific to Stack Overflow, it's no big deal.


I didn't even know that Meta Stack Overflow wasn't just the meta site of Stack Overflow.

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible