Ana

Hey folks! As you may have seen on meta, at the community's request, the site name has been changed to Psychology & Neuroscience Stack Exchange. If you see any bits or bobs we overlooked, let me know!

@enderland actually, if it's all the same to you, I'll edit the title of your post so that it's a little clearer what's being celebrated, and drop an answer as official confirmation that yes, the name change is complete!

cool. happy weekend folks!

I have to step out but @Thomas, want to threw a new meta post up there with the latest, and we can see what bubbles up and speak again next week?

We need people who want to not just build stuff, but who want to build stuff well.

Yep!

ya know I've been thinking on this, and I'm pretty excited about this direction for you all (yes, I know it's an articulation of that which has already taking place, but bare with me). there are more new developers than ever, more new frameworks and libraries being pushed at them from every direction, and almost no one anywhere to advise them on the craftsmenship of software

@maple_shaft you're kidding :p

@ThomasOwens Indeed.

Reminds me...gnat's meta post about what should be done when debugging questions inevitably do show up was a little premature, but it's still the right conversation.

I mean, I'm speaking purely for myself, as an actual novice programmer. And hopefully there are at least a few others out there who could be trusted to pick up on the same sensibilities when faced with that list.

As a novice programmer who wants to be a good programmer, if I show up here and read that, I know from those 4 bullets exactly what I should and shouldn't ask.

so...

it's true

What would you think about...

Looks solid.

As do I.

Like Thomas said, those questions wouldn't be off-topic, they just wouldn't have a place-holder there for 'em.

@maple_shaft Given that algorithms are something software engineers may employ to implement a design, doesn't it stand to reason that the folks you want participating would be able to deduce that themselves?

Then it seems we should be inviting those same questions under the umbrella of design, rather than algorithms and data structures.

show me what you mean for each, would you?

yeah, I think that works

@ThomasOwens You mean like this?

Can we decide on either 'process and methods' or 'requirements engineering' to add? Figure out which one we think gets us most bang for our buck?

Ah, yeah. Overlap with PM.SE is something I want to think about a bit more actually...but one thing at a time. I see what you mean about 'process and methods', and why leaving that out might be riding the line in failing to convey the site's purpose.

How does that sit with you at this stage?

To review:

Cool. I recognize that this was a sticky one when we last brought it up, though I've continued to be rather partial to the proposal Shog laid out here because it seems to communicate the most impactful information most quickly.

Okay, so we're good on the new name and the new tagline. Anything else on your mind before we dig into bullets on /on-topic?

Totally.

Honestly I recommend we stick with the tagline we have. Mention of the SDLC is the one thing, in our long, laborious conversations that got us on the same page. It's not perfect, it will not encapsulate everything while rooting around all edge cases, but it gets us most of the way there and provides clarity for most of the people whom you want to attract.

Hm.

reading

Oh and FYI Shog is out so he won't be joining us, but I didn't want to keep you waiting any longer.

Today, I'd like get back to figuring out the bullets for /on-topic and just generally make sure we keep being on the same page. Anything you all want to bring up after this past month's conversations?

Been following meta conversations closely since we last spoke, and I think the community's been surfacing a lot of the right questions. Honestly, it's been great to see folks getting involved. When we last spoke, we came to consensus on why we're doing any of this in the first place, and then got clear on the new site name and tagline, represented here:

Hey!

@ThomasOwens @RobertHarvey Got time in a couple hours to pick up the name change conversation?

Happy weekend y'all.

...And it looks like it might be a little late in the day for folks. @ThomasOwens ping us when you're around again and we'll pick up where we left off last Friday.

@Shog9 #2 sounds a little ambiguous...you talking about getting on the same page 'bout our goals for /help/on-topic?

This was solid. Thanks guys.

I recommend a new question.

@RobertHarvey Got a nice ring to it.