Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Challenges Meta
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

Post History

71%
+3 −0
Q&A How shall we handle our old (imported) content?

To be honest, part of the reason why I asked this question on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) looks a lot like a clone site. There's 366-ish pages of questi...

posted 5y ago by becky82‭  ·  edited 5y ago by becky82‭

Answer
#4: Post edited by user avatar becky82‭ · 2020-01-15T12:38:10Z (almost 5 years ago)
  • To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2">this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.
  • There's 366-ish pages of questions. There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers. Writing.CO is basically a clone site. There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*
  • > The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.
  • > (<a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010)
  • There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site. Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?). I don't see an easy answer to this problem.
  • While people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this. Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone. (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)
  • To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2">this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.
  • There's 366-ish pages of questions. There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers. Writing.CO is basically a clone site. There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*
  • > The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.
  • > (<a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010)
  • There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site. Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?). I don't see an easy answer to this problem.
  • Also, while people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this. Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone. (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)
#3: Post edited by user avatar becky82‭ · 2020-01-15T12:36:35Z (almost 5 years ago)
  • To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2"this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.
  • There's 366-ish pages of questions. There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers. Writing.CO is basically a clone site. There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*
  • > The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.
  • > (<a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010)
  • There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site. Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?). I don't see an easy answer to this problem.
  • While people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this. Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone. (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)
  • To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2">this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.
  • There's 366-ish pages of questions. There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers. Writing.CO is basically a clone site. There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*
  • > The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.
  • > (<a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010)
  • There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site. Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?). I don't see an easy answer to this problem.
  • While people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this. Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone. (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)
#2: Post edited by user avatar becky82‭ · 2020-01-15T12:35:44Z (almost 5 years ago)
  • To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2"this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.
  • There's 366-ish pages of questions. There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers. Writing.CO is basically a clone site. There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*
  • > The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.
  • > <sub><a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010</sub>
  • There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site. Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?). I don't see an easy answer to this problem.
  • While people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this. Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone. (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)
  • To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2"this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.
  • There's 366-ish pages of questions. There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers. Writing.CO is basically a clone site. There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*
  • > The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.
  • > (<a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010)
  • There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site. Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?). I don't see an easy answer to this problem.
  • While people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this. Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone. (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)
#1: Initial revision by user avatar becky82‭ · 2020-01-15T12:33:53Z (almost 5 years ago) 
To be honest, part of the reason why I asked <a href="https://forum.codidact.org/t/is-the-plan-to-reproduce-each-and-every-stack-exchange-site/603/2"this question</a> on the Codidact forum was because of how writing.codidact.com (Writing.CO) *looks a lot like a clone site*.

There's 366-ish pages of questions.  There's maybe 360-ish pages of cloned questions and answers.  Writing.CO is basically a clone site.  There's going to be a difficult decision here: *What percentage of cloned material do we want on Writing.CO?*

> The questions you ask now will set the tone and topic for a long time to come. Try not to "seed" your site too much or the whole thing is going to start to look staid and forced. That will not make for an interesting site.  
> <sub><a href="https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5563/89635">Robert Cartaino</a>; see also <a href="https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/07/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/">*Your New Site: Asking the First Questions*</a>, 2010</sub>

There are non-negligible drawbacks to being a clone site.  Yet, there are drawbacks to not cloning (e.g. what if someone asks a duplicate of a Writing.SE question?).  I don't see an easy answer to this problem.

While people assert "QPixel is not Codidact", the URL (writing.codidact.com) overrides this.  Practically, Codidact *is* QPixel, and QPixel is a basically a Stack Exchange clone.  (Moreover, it's likely that Writing.CO is going to be the make-or-break site for Codidact.)