Timeline for The company’s commitment to rebuilding the relationship with you, our community
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 21, 2023 at 14:48 | comment | added | Todd Wilcox | This answer seems to have aged very well. | |
| Feb 11, 2022 at 17:09 | comment | added | einpoklum | It looks like they aren't "showing us the money". | |
| Mar 2, 2020 at 3:44 | comment | added | jhpratt | Is part of the "respect" mentioned acknowledging that the company screwed up with relicensing and will backtrack? | |
| S Feb 23, 2020 at 21:24 | history | suggested | Toby Bartels | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
I was stuck on this sentence for a minute, trying to parse "follow" as a verb, when I realized that this is what was meant. At least, I hope so!
|
| Feb 23, 2020 at 20:27 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 23, 2020 at 21:24 | |||||
| Feb 21, 2020 at 10:10 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @GeorgeMReinstateMonica "There must be some interesting statistics there :-), which I'm sure we won't get." The bit of statistics that were shared basically stated that they did not see any significant change in behavior but that the reach of meta may be larger than previously assumed. Either they have already seen an effect but don't want to disclose it, or they fear of what might happen (they might assume inertia in the system), or they have changed their view of the data or this is just words. One or a combination of these things. | |
| Feb 21, 2020 at 3:59 | comment | added | Steve Bennett | This is a huge improvement in tone, and transparency. Even acknowledging the crisis, and SO's misteps, seemed to be impossible for SO recently. Looking forward to what happens next - keep it up! | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 20:36 | comment | added | berry120 | Completely agree. I really hope this is the start of a great thing - but I can't help but see the parallels to this post, which started off with a great positive reaction, and then tailed off to be the second most downvoted post ever when it became clear the words were mostly, if not entirely, empty. Certainly nothing against Teresa, and I wish her all the best - but we (as in the community) would be foolish not to be rather sceptical at this point. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 19:26 | comment | added | user625792 | Oh. have they finally noticed how badly they've damaged the relationship? Well, that a step. There must be some interesting statistics there :-), which I'm sure we won't get. But rebuilding what you've blown to smithereens for no reason at all is quite another matter. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 16:51 | comment | added | anonymous | @NathanMerrill Except SEI didn't "add advertising" - they went from a curated advertising model to just using Google Ads for the site. The problem that people had wasn't hat the advertising existed, it was that SEI forfeited their control of it ... because "reasons" ... and introduced a platform that presented people with NSFW ads. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 16:11 | comment | added | Gloweye | I quite agree. Trust but verify. And I want so bad to trust. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 15:17 | comment | added | fbueckert | @NathanMerrill And the only way to know which one is correct is through those changes. I've had enough of listening. I want to start seeing. No, I need to start seeing. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 14:37 | comment | added | Nathan Merrill | @fbueckert my last response wasn't a proper full one. From my reading of the post, it really appears as if Teresa spent time going back and reading and considering the posts made by meta, and actually gets it. I don't know if that is true. But to me, that appears to be the case. Whether the words show true understanding of the site is up to the reader. If there really is understanding, then there was real action going on. If there isn't understanding, then I agree: they are vapid words. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 14:21 | comment | added | Nathan Merrill | The feature wasn't "Launch pornographic ads" or "Make a messy paywall". It was "Add advertising" and "Build Teams for SO". I can get behind monetization models, but not in the way they did it. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 14:18 | comment | added | Lundin | @NathanMerrill I'm more thinking about features like "lets make our front page a messy paywall" or "lets launch pornographic ads network-wide". That's not just a lack of understanding of how the site works, it's a lack of understanding how humans and the world work. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 14:18 | comment | added | Nathan Merrill | @fbueckert Everything the site does is with the intention to placate people and get them to continue doing free labour. That's the entire model of the site. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 14:16 | comment | added | fbueckert | This post, unlike the others, shows a real understanding of the current situation. I'm gonna have to disagree with you, @NathanMerrill. From a cynical standpoint, it's PR spin, meant to continue to placate everyone and continue doing free labour for the benefit of SE. I want to believe it's more than that, but we've been through this song and dance too many times to take SE at their word anymore. Until I see actual changes, I'm assuming this is nothing more but the same. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 14:07 | comment | added | Nathan Merrill | @Lundin Releasing a Poorly Considered Feature is a symptom of not listening. These were obviously Considered Features, as they spent time and money. What makes them Poorly Considered Features is the lack of understanding of how the site works. Updating the licensing is a good idea at it's core, but the implementation of how they do it makes all the difference. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 13:37 | comment | added | Lundin | @NathanMerrill No, the root problem is that the company suddenly launches Poorly Considered Feature out of the blue. Then when meta complains it falls upon deaf ears, but the root problem is the person who decided to launch Poorly Considered Feature. The root problem isn't even that Poorly Considered Feature was released without community feedback, but that someone came up with it in the first place. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 12:18 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | Agree. This reminds me of basketball: when a coach makes too many mistakes, the team replace the coach, bringing someone new, with tons of promises. But can the coach fulfill those promises? Usually not. They're as empty as the air into which the words are blown to. | |
| Feb 20, 2020 at 3:18 | comment | added | Nathan Merrill | I'd be careful about saying "Words are cheap" indefinitely. There are 100 different things this community wants. The root problem has always been Meta falling upon deaf ears. This post, unlike the others, shows a real understanding of the current situation. To me, the fact that the CPO has taken time to understand the issues is a very real action. | |
| Feb 19, 2020 at 22:41 | comment | added | David says Reinstate Monica | I really agree with this post, the problem is that it's like the 5th time I've agreed with such a post. We've had the same promises from Fullerton, Chipps, the new CEO (sorry forgot name), and a few others I think. And that's all I'm just the last ~6 months. Every time the top response is 'good start, now follow it up'. Every time things just get worse | |
| Feb 19, 2020 at 18:46 | comment | added | Teresa Dietrich | I totally understand this sentiment and if I were in your shoes I would feel the same way. I personally believe actions are much more powerful than words in nearly all situations. I promise to back up these words with action, starting with the commitments I made above. We have a long backlog of stuff we need to work through and deliver to you all, but we are adding to it daily, prioritizing it based on feedback and ensuring we deliver it. | |
| Feb 19, 2020 at 18:16 | history | edited | terdon | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
typo
|
| Feb 19, 2020 at 17:25 | comment | added | amon | I share this sentiment. When I wrote that wretched Firing Mods and Forced Relicensing post almost 5 months ago, this statement was roughly what I was hoping for as a “good-faith effort towards mending the rift”. But so much more harm has been done in the meanwhile that I'm keeping my expectations very low. Teresa has a long list of really important items, but following through will be non-trivial. In the past, the community managers who noticeably cared had no real agency left. | |
| Feb 19, 2020 at 17:11 | history | edited | fbueckert | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Feb 19, 2020 at 16:45 | history | answered | fbueckert | CC BY-SA 4.0 |