Hmm, interesting site. Looks familiar ... almost too familiar ... waaaaaitaminute: http://phpispoetry.com/question_page/question/16 looks just like http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2283937/how-should-i-ethi... . Yup, an exact copy, right down to mentions of "bounty system" and "thanks to all the Stack users", and the only answer you have is likewise word-for-word identical to SO's highest voted answer. Is that both your question and your answer that you asked on SO, back there in 2010? If not, see this for proper CC-attribution guidelines - SO allows for republishing of user contributions, it just requires a few simple rules to be followed for it: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ Quote:
"If you republish this content, we require that you:
- Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
- Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
- Show the author names for every question and answer
- Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)
Alas, you aren't doing any of these things on the site; worse, the texts seem to suggest that you and "peter" have written all of that yourself. http://phpispoetry.com/user/best That is an unfortunate issue that you've overlooked; people tend to get all possessive of the stuff they're written ;)
As for the site, it looks nice and clean, and feels very responsive. Perhaps making the tags interactive would be good - but I feel you're working on that even as I'm typing this :)
Yup, I was thinking that was the case, and that you didn't "act in bad faith", so to speak :) In other words, copying SO's content would actually be a good way to "preseed" the site with interesting q&a - if the attribution requirements are followed (some people get really angry when they see their own content misattributed).
Anyway, I was a bit confused about the +1/+share buttons; you might want to differentiate them a bit further. Apart from that, I like the site's extreme simplicity, both in look and operation.
"If you republish this content, we require that you: - Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine. - Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345) - Show the author names for every question and answer - Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)
Alas, you aren't doing any of these things on the site; worse, the texts seem to suggest that you and "peter" have written all of that yourself. http://phpispoetry.com/user/best That is an unfortunate issue that you've overlooked; people tend to get all possessive of the stuff they're written ;)
As for the site, it looks nice and clean, and feels very responsive. Perhaps making the tags interactive would be good - but I feel you're working on that even as I'm typing this :)