Reducing user frustration

Question

There has been some minor stir about a user who apparently rage-quit P.SE. This isn't exactly common, but it isn't exactly uncommon either.

I admit to this being a less than idea question itself - I am asking several things at once and I don't believe that there is a single answer to this. However, chat while archived is ephemeral in the minds of its denizens. Blog post on this isn't the answer, and P.SE certainly isn't the right place. A Meta post seems to be the only reasonable equivalent to the watering hole that has some permanence in the minds of people (at least more than chat).

(Related How to prevent “Why is my question being closed?” and User Frustration? - though this is only one part of it).

I believe there are a number of contributing factors to this - the question is what can we do not only as P.SE but also SO and to an extent, the stack exchange network.

This began with a post on Stack Overflow - How do I take my web dev learning to the next level?. There were comments in this that I recall (I might be wrong, if there is issue, I believe a mod can clarify the specifics of this) that were in essence:

• Career advice should be asked on P.SE -- someone (1)
• Ok, but why don't you just answer this? -- OP (2)

At this point the question was closed, and the original poster reasked the question on P.SE. Someone got in an answer before it was closed here. (3)

The poster then asked on meta Closed as not constructive?. While he got answers to it, they were not the ones he was looking for and (IMHO) was a bit argumentative in the comments to the answers provided - I was less inclined to help him after he responded with what amounts to "that's what you think."

The question meta was downvoted (4) which lead to an edit, asking why it was downvoted.

Following this, there appears to have a rage-quit from P.SE (his account is still active on SO).

So:

1. What can we do to help clarify the proper migration criteria to the SO community at large so they don't refer off topic questions to P.SE.
2. I'm not sure what can be done to help this, but it was a point of raising frustration for the OP.
3. Again, sometimes people get answers in before the close. This lead to the increased frustration as expressed in the meta question: "The only answer given (likely before it was closed) clearly suggests that the question is constructive." .The desire to help is there, even when we know its off topic for the site. Myself, I admit to answering a question and close voting it.
4. Meta downvotes are different. However, without going through the various meta faq's, one likely isn't aware of this on their first trip to meta (especially if they haven't lurked). While those familiar with the site are aware of this, it is another point of raising frustration.

On any of these points, what can we do to help people from becoming more frustrated? Or was this just an unfortunate crash of personality and site philosophy that couldn't be averted?

Answer 1

1. We already removed programmers as a default migration path from SO because they don't know what is on topic, we can't do much more apart from being active in SO and calling anyone one suggesting programmers inappropriately. This is a problem for all sites related to SO not just us, they have a ton of users that only know the name of a site thinking they are helping when they aren't.
2. there is no discussion point.
3. getting answers doesn't mean that the question is acceptable. The way rep and badges work there is incentive to answer bad questions even when you know they are bad. Stack exchange is a complicated place, there are many "rules" that are vaguely defined or hidden in meta posts. The only way to help users here is to get them to actually read before posting which is an age old problem.
4. Meta is a different place, it has its own FAQ explaining those differences. People don't read the FAQ's though and just get angry because they don't understand. There isn't anything we can do other than try to get them to read the FAQ.

The Problem we have is there are a large group of user that walk past the No Shirt No Service sign and then complain when they get no service without wearing a shirt. We can't solve this problem for them, we either lower our standards or have a group of angry users because they can't read.

Answer 2

I want to chime in on this with a response as a recent migrant from SO proper who ran into this exact issue. I'll reference my meta discussion, I think it had a lot of good responses and definitely helped me:

How to better fit the "on-topic" format

At least after opening a topic on meta to try and clarify what I was doing wrong, I gained some constructive insight in how to word things to better fit PSE and hopefully prevent early closing on my questions. I think a lot of the problem stems in the perception that SO proper is the "technical" site, where posting code or confronting compiler errors is to be expected, whereas PSE is perceived as the "catch-all" alternative.

What I think is hard to translate into moderation here is that it's easy for first time users to get this impression even if they read the FAQ. This is because ultimately we must admit that the application of the "on-topic" section of our FAQ is going to be assessed subjectively the first time the user posts. Unless they read 10-30 previous questions that have been closed, they aren't going to establish a base-use case for how the moderation regarding staying on-topic is applied (the Really-Existing Moderation, to borrow the psychoanalytic term)

There is no denying that having your first question abruptly closed is a huge buzzkill in terms of entering a new community. I think it is to be avoided as much as possible... new users should be encouraged to reword their cases into a something less subjective. There are going to be hopeless questions, of course, but the ones that show a little promise could be worked into the format, especially if they skirt that "specific to programmers" line. That isn't always possible in the sometimes small frame of time they get hit with the moderator nerfbat.

What I would propose as a potentially constructive practice would be giving some exception to questions that have been upvoted by other users. There's no reason a question that has received 3-4 upvotes early that is "arguably" a fit for the meta should be closed within the first 30 minutes before any potential responses or ideas on potential revisions could be given. Because of the way posts are flagged, there's a pretty quick "pile on" effect once a question is flagged for close. That does make it feel, qualitatively, that moderation is a bit aggressive here on PSE.

Just my two cents.