Let's be honest, there are already some big dogs in the park we're entering.

Should we be structuring this site around the expectation that people will go to Wilmott for X or NP for Y?

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ ExpertSexChange, oops I mean experts-exchange, was a big dog in the computer programming Q&A world, and everyone uses StackOverflow now ;) $\endgroup$ – Neil McGuigan Feb 11 '11 at 17:44

Those other sites will still serve a very important purpose: for discussions. This simply isn't permitted here, and those sites already do that well.

The primary difference is the platform and everything that comes along with it.

People should come here for answers to real questions. Whenever I go to those other sites I end up getting really frustrated as I waste time reading dribble from people who have no clue in order to get to the good material. Here, not only do good answers get pushed to the top and good users get rewarded, there is also a strong community (including moderators who understand this) which should serve to raise the bar on questions that don't meet a minimum level of quality (enforceable through the wiki nature of the site). Other forums simply can't compete with the software and community-structure.

In terms of the competition aspect of the question: IMO, if we provide a better service then we will win on that front. I could easily expect within the year for this site to be the first source for answers on quantitative finance. When StackOverflow started, it also had to compete against established sites.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You're a deserving and able candidate for a moderator Shane :) ! Just want to show my support and appreciation for your work on here. $\endgroup$ – user98 Feb 9 '11 at 22:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "Whenever I go to those other sites I end up getting really frustrated as I waste time reading dribble from people who have no clue." -- on the other hand, people like Piterbarg or Joshi hang out on Wilmott, not here. In general, I don't like the attitude "they suck, we are 100x better". Quant SE is different and has different goals. I don't feel as if the overall level of competence here was higher than on Wilmott. Rather the opposite. $\endgroup$ – quant_dev Feb 10 '11 at 21:49
  • $\begingroup$ @quant_dev I was referencing the difference in software, not their community. Here, good answers are pushed to the top, that's why StackOverflow is so successful. Those other sites don't do a good job controlling the signal-to-noise ratio. We have a ways to go, but I'm optimistic that this will be useful. Edited the comment in order to reflect that. $\endgroup$ – Shane Feb 10 '11 at 21:55
  • $\begingroup$ "on the other hand, people like Piterbarg or Joshi hang out on Wilmott, not here.": How do we get the big names to hang out here as well? $\endgroup$ – James Webster Feb 18 '11 at 0:55
  • $\begingroup$ I think the fact that Wimlott.com was founded by... Paul Wilmott ;-) had a lot to do with it. $\endgroup$ – quant_dev Feb 24 '11 at 13:31
  • $\begingroup$ @Shane Replace "good" with "community-approved". All SE sites suffer from the fact that question-asker-types don't rate answers; question-answerer-types rate answers. $\endgroup$ – isomorphismes Jul 6 '11 at 19:27
  • $\begingroup$ @Shane Are you saying the other sites don't give answers to real questions? That seems like a straw man. $\endgroup$ – isomorphismes Jul 6 '11 at 19:33
  • $\begingroup$ @Shane Based on @chrisaycock's response and yours I think my question was mis-read as "How will QF.SE beat NP and W?" I wasn't trying to imply that QF.SE would compete head-on with those two, but it seems that your answer boils down to: "It seeks to best them in terms of answer quality." On the other hand your answer may be "QF.SE excludes discussions." $\endgroup$ – isomorphismes Jul 6 '11 at 19:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Lao Tzu I am simply making the point that this software is superior to a discussion forum for answering answerable questions. It doesn't make any effort at support discussions or subjective questions. It's ability to sort and highlight good answers (and questions) seems to me to be a significant improvement over the existing model. $\endgroup$ – Shane Jul 6 '11 at 19:45

Quant SE is for professional quants (as well as interested students and academics) to ask questions they actually face in their day-to-day work. We've been pretty vigilant about closing questions that fall outside this realm. And because this site is dedicated to Q&A, there are no discussions about the news, etc.

We certainly won't be the only site around. QuantNet is the top resource for MFE students. The newly launched Quantly aims to be the Hacker News of the quant community.

I assume your real question is:

How will QF.SE compete with NP and Wilmott?

Stack Exchange competes just fine against Experts Exchange, Quora, Yahoo Answers, Wiki Answers, etc. Part of what SE offers is a really elegant platform, to which only Quora comes close. But mostly it's because each SE site is focused on one task, so there are a lot fewer distractions.

  • $\begingroup$ The real question is not how will QF.SE compete but how will it fit in. The other two sites you mentioned seem like just as much of upstarts as QF.SE. $\endgroup$ – isomorphismes Jul 6 '11 at 19:31
  • $\begingroup$ "Quantly was a news site for the quantitative finance community. It started in November 2010 and was retired in May 2013." Interesting to look back on this now. $\endgroup$ – isomorphismes Nov 19 '13 at 17:14

I'm more than thrilled to see another quant community that I can learn from and participate in. We need more participants, more discussion, more Q&A, more blogs, more news in this niche. There are really not many resource in this field.

Each site does one thing well and everyone should be able to choose which site fits his personal taste to be a part of.


You must log in to answer this question.

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