What are we trying to build?

[Marc.2377]

@mattjbrent

For me the biggest question around this is -

if we could put what we want to achieve into 1 or 2 sentences - what would those sentences be?

My take: “Ask questions, get answers - you have a voice here”.

It requires some context - but chances are, if you’re here, you understand it.

As we gain more visibility, there have been quite a few suggestions to deviate from the SE model in significant ways, which are definitely not without merit. But the truth is, that is not the objective I was aiming for when joining this particular project, personally - and being with the team from day one, I can say it wasn’t/isn’t the objective of the majority, if not all of the core contributors.

In other words: Building something that differs significantly from the Q&A model as we came to know from SE is not what I personally believe in, and is not what I signed up for.

Fellow @MakotoTheKnight said in a post from another thread:

@MakotoTheKnight

So, my initial thought: why recreate that?

(…) each candidate sucks in its own right in that it’s attempting to ape what Stack Exchange did. To a degree, every clone would be wise to do so since it’s the archetype of successful Q&A.

However, it all becomes a bit same-y . Nothing about those systems pops out or adds more value than not just going to Stack Overflow or some other Stack Exchange site wouldn’t provide. Worse, it’s completely unclear how new features, which would differentiate from or add value to this Q&A platform, are capable of being added. It may be simple; it may be pulling teeth. (…)

(…) I cannot stress enough that an effort like this will sink if it turns out to look and feel just like Stack Exchange, since this lack the notoriety.

And in fact, I disagree. The reason none of the previous software implementations succeeded in replacing Stack Exchange is definitely not that they tried to mimic it. On the contrary, it’s probably because they didn’t do it well enough (and not just on a technical level).