28

animuson of the Stack Overflow team said here:

Blog Overflow is actually going to be shutting down completely soon, so it doesn't make sense for us to invest time in fixing any bugs for it. We'll be reaching out to all the individual communities who currently have a blog on their site's Meta over the coming weeks to discuss whether they want to let their blog die or transfer it to an alternate blogging platform and maintaining it on their own...

To have more time for deciding and doing things, I already ask here now: do we want to continue with the blog? What is your opinion?

38

Let's move the blog to a new platform, to keep it and to improve it and to have even more fun with it.

Why to keep it?

  • Blog article authors investested time and effort, this should never be lost.
  • We got a wonderful interview series, established by the incredible Paulo Cereda.

How can we improve it?

  • Responsive design for better viewing on phones
  • Featured images in lists for more fun browsing it
  • Infinite scrolling
  • more: we can discuss in a separate meta post

I made a quick demo with this temporary name:

http://tex-talk.net

Just to show that we can migrate, we can change the design, we can go on. There's still a lot to improve (spam protection, security, code highlighting, MarkDown support, images, ...)

Regarding a name: we can suggest names and vote on it in a separate meta post - if we decide to continue that way.

4

I don't see anything on the blog that couldn't really go into a meta question. In some cases the blog layout formatting is nicer than what could be done on meta, but in most cases I think the meta mark up tools are sufficient. New "blog" posts on meta could be tagged so they can be easily found and initially so they are given attention. All the old blog posts (and to an extent the comments) could be copied over to meta.

The big advantage of moving to meta is simply a reduction of effort maintaining a blog.

  • Technically easiest. Though the meta site doesn't have any TeX content and is not expected to have. With the same reason the blog post could go to the main site, with an introducing question. 150 meta sites (I guess) are not used for blogging about the main topic. I understood from SE: die or transfer&maintain somewhere else. No effort for the blog goes to main or meta. – Stefan Kottwitz Oct 24 '16 at 20:47
  • 1
    The meta site is kind of hidden behind the main site, mainly for long term users as I see. A blog though would be somehow in front, seen from the outside, connecting blog world and feed aggregators with the TeX.SE site. – Stefan Kottwitz Oct 24 '16 at 20:48
  • 13
    while i think that this is well worth considering, i think that the interview formatting would not transfer easily to the meta site. considerable effort has gone into the formatting (i know, because i've done some of it). for that, i would prefer to see a different solution. the interviews are linked from other sites, and they'd be essentially lost if simply moved into the meta thread. i'm sure that one of the tex organizations would be willing to adopt them, if no other suitable home is found. – barbara beeton Oct 24 '16 at 21:12
  • @barbarabeeton I think that future interviews could be keep in special chat rooms and then a single meta question that would link to the individual chat rooms. The old interviews already have markup and could hopefully be ported over as meta questions without much difficulty. – StrongBad Oct 24 '16 at 21:16
  • 8
    how easy is it to edit the content of a chat room? not meaning to be difficult, but the editing of existing interviews is not "linear"; some reorganization has taken place to make the flow easier to follow, less like the tex.se chat, which can get quite disjointed. i am probably biased, but i've edited quite a few interviews for publication, and am aware of the problems that can arise. if the goal is for these interviews to be read, then the "raw" version is usually not nearly as inviting as a version that has had a bit of tidying up. – barbara beeton Oct 25 '16 at 0:59
  • 5
    I'm strongly with @barbarabeeton in that the post-editing of the interviews is necessary, moreorless to de-shuffle shuffled discussions. – yo' Oct 25 '16 at 14:51
  • 4
    meta is not appropriate because this type of one-sided decisions keep coming in and everytime it happens we have to comply to some weird decision that makes only sense to SO but nowhere else. – percusse Oct 26 '16 at 15:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .