43

I think it's interesting that Robert's post above focus so much on communities - the idea that a site proposal should be made with an existing community in mind is new to me, and none of the site launches I've been part of really had a true community before the site launched. Fundamentally this is a problem because nothing in Area 51 is set up to foster ...


40

I understand your eagerness to get these questions answered. But part of building a Stack Exchange site is to make sure the participants can properly build a reliable canon of knowledge. The core reason we created Stack Exchange was to assure that information posted on the Internet is widely vetted, edited, and improved by a thriving community of peers. ...


38

This change is now live! I will be monitoring what proposals get removed to make sure things are working as intended.


37

There already is a cryptocurrencies site. The problem is that it's called Bitcoin, not Cryptocurrencies, so users of anything but bitcoin don't realise their questions would be on-topic there. From their tour: Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies is a question and answer site for cryptocurrency enthusiasts. It's built and run by you as part of the Stack Exchange ...


34

Going through the proposal process quickly appears to be a good signal that a proposed site is viable (because failed proposals evaporate, I don't have statistics on how many failed in private beta after making the 4/4 deadline, but I don't recall there being very many). However, the opposite situation of taking a while to go through the process doesn't ...


30

No, you want to give the community a chance to vote for all questions, both up and down. The score needs to reflect (budding) community opinion. By locking a question to a score of max 10, you remove that option. Downvoters would gain an unfair advantage, as their downvote would suddenly weigh more than the upvotes. The voting process defines the community,...


29

If you don't have a high level of professional/technical proficiency in any particular field of study, we also have many mainstream sites in subjects like Coffee Music Fans Sustainable Living Parenting Pets Gardening Cooking Travel Movies & TV Physical Fitness Politics The Great Outdoors Photography Board & Card Games Lifehacks These communities ...


25

My plans are to develop an open source Chrome Extension+Firefox addon+ UserScript, that make StackExchange works in Hebrew and other RTL languages. All what it is doing is to override the style and make it RTL. And also translate some basic buttons (Questions, Answers, Ask Question, etc'...) If the team of StackExchange will see the extension and like it. ...


25

I agree this is a major problem when it happens — but it does have a solution pending, sort of. I've designed a "circuit breaker" which addresses this exact issue; unfortunately, I don't think it will get implemented for quite some time (at least months, but probably closer to next year if ever). In the interest of transparency — I've ...


24

I am now assuming the there is an OR statement between the two requirements? When I read the rule I had concluded that it was Bullet One AND Bullet Two. I see http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/87955/magic is still active with 5 followers and 2 questions I see http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/87795/home-ownership is still active with 3 ...


23

The "rarely-visited meta" — as you called it — was a big part of the problem. Meta hosts the core governance of the site. I wish I could point you to the myriad of efforts that went into getting this site going again. The Community Managers, Moderators, and top avid users tried valiantly through a multi-year effort to try to energize this ...


23

Traditional localization typically entails offering one site, where the 'chrome' (or user interface elements, help text, prompts, etc) is available in multiple languages. As I looked into how other sites were offering support in multiple languages, this was the predominate way to do it. Many still have the 'countrycode.domain.com' available for search ...


23

Yes! The community team is keeping an eye on things. Robert has a degree of finesse and warmth that positively can't be replicated or imitated and we know that's going to be missed, but we're going to do our best to support you here. Please be patient with us! We can certainly use any constructive feedback as we pick things up. We're here to help.


22

Yes the up votes and down vote limits per proposal on Area 51 should match. This related question from Jan 2014 (I just found it) seems to indicate that those expressing a preference, prefer to match limits. The argument is made at the related question, that matching these would deviate from the standards at Stack Exchange. I disagree, on Stack Exchange ...


21

In short, this undermines anything other than technology sites. And perhaps that's the point, given the structure of how Stack Overflow currently makes money. The site offers a great opportunity to sciences. The collaborative structure, the protocol keeping questions and answers on topic and useful, and the efforts to circumvent elitism all foster ...


21

Translated to English, this proposal is saying "StackExchange doesn't want to participate in building new communities". The community needs to be ready and Area51 doesn't want to be the tool for people to build a new community. But this is not the way StackExchange flourished. It has successfully build a communities of people around various topics. I think ...


20

The asterisk indicates that a proposal has NOT yet met the Minimum Activity Requirements for Area 51. The asterisk (*) was originally visible to employees only so I could see which proposals were still in the submission process before I spent too much time vetting their content. I found it really useful, so I suggested making that information public to ...


20

This is a reasonable policy to apply to Area51 (although it was done rather abruptly). But Stack Exchange should provide some other process or mechanism to create beta sites that have a good probability of turning into avid and active SE communities even though at the outset they lack a coherent community of at least 200 people to advance them through this ...


18

Good news! — We tweaked the process a bit to avoid closing proposals soon after starting a new phase… and without adding any undue complexity. Instead of a 2-year limit, we are now going to institute proposal limit of 1 year in Definition + 1 year in Commitment This 1+1-year method takes care of two important scenarios — (1) You don't ...


17

Being frustrated with how the Answers.Onstartups knowledge was closed, we re-created the community over the last month: Bright Journey More details on this answer here: Site "On Startups" is closed - what to do now? It took us a month working on this 'round the clock, but it was well worth it. There was tremendous knowledge on the site and ...


17

We (Stack Exchange) do not believe in the adage "if you build it, they will come." Every time we tried that, the site has failed utterly. The Definition phase does more than just define the scope of the proposal. This phase helps determine if there is a sufficient depth of questions to keep the site interesting, while measuring if there is enough ...


16

The "no activity" rule is bad. You're destroying information and contributing to link rot. For example, The Armory, facing imminent failure for spending a year in Definition, was a reboot of an earlier proposal, which also failed to pass Definition before expiration, but which is presently deleted (... which was itself an attempt to reincarnate a site that ...


15

I guess NASA can't take a joke;-) No, seriously, we only need 14 people to commit to this as of writing, we should try to get these from any source we can. One the site launches, I imagine it will be https://space.stackexchange.com/, and that will avoid this problem entirely.


15

I think announcements like these can have value. Most people probably aren't going to read the FAQ, but are more likely to see those discussion posts because they're front and center. Area 51 is, by the admission of a few SO staff members, not an ideal solution for the new site proposal process. It's run using a modified and outdated version of the SE Q&...


15

Hopefully these changes will help, but I am skeptical. The real issue is addressed in https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/?cb=1. Most new proposals mean gaining non-SE users. For many, the benefits of SE's QA model do not outweigh the costs of learning a new platform (particularly for older ...


14

Area 51 is a reference to a U.S. Airforce Installation in Nevada. It is popular with conspiracy theorists (humorous or not) connecting it to aliens. Quoting from the Wikipedia article: Its secretive nature and undoubted connection to classified aircraft research, together with reports of unusual phenomena, have led Area 51 to become a focus of modern UFO ...


14

Area 51 is full of ideas, and the vast majority of them will never become sites. That's okay. That is exactly what the Area 51 process is designed to determine. If you don't care for a particular idea, don't support it. Without support, it wont become a site. There are plenty of proposals in support of specific products — I'm not seeing a case for ...


14

UPDATE: We have transitioned all accounts. In order to regain access to your old Answers.Onstartups account either: Use the forgot password feature: http://www.brightjourney.com/a/password/new OR If you signed up using Facebook or Google+, just login as normal: http://www.brightjourney.com/a/login === ORIGINAL POST: After a month of working round the ...


14

I'd went even further and suggest, that the limit of the downvotes should equal the number of used upvotes. Voting on example questions has other purpose as voting on the launched sites. Here I use votes to say, which question I'd like to see on the site, and which I wouldn't like to see. Saying what I'd like to see is more important, so the upvotes should ...


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