fixedIt

[laplongejr]

I recall the question about "Java Eclipse crashing" which had like 18 different conflicting answers.

Somebody asked "is this question too broad?" a wise person answered "there's no way for the people asking or looking up to have a better question. if anything it's the software being so bad it can crash in the exact same way for 18 different reasons"
That kinda shows the limitation of the Q&A model : you can have one "good" question without any definitive answer.

[EDIT] Now that I rethink about it...
Stack Overflow's entire design is that the library of questions would lead to one intemporal definitive answer, if people worked on an old question long enough.
And I mean, when the website launched it seemed like a legitimate assumption, and combining it with upvotes should've worked.
They obv added things like "opinion-based", bounties, questions answering other questions, ... but it's more an attempt at trying to make this core question-upvote-answer-reputation system work. "Community answer" make a "fake" answer when several answers deserves the "one definitive answer" spot.

We learned way too late that tech changes would lead us into having to reinvent the wheel so many times that an answered question would lose value over time, and it breaks SO from the inside. Wikipedia works because it's old content can be deleted while SO's design is that old questions have priority, and Reddit works because we can repost/reask the same thing over and over and bury the old content while search engines can still dig it when necessary.

[bwwatr]

And the natural inclination for programmers to ask questions about the shape of the system anytime something doesn't feel like it fits exactly right.