> They don't acknowledge this was a problem.

Most people who came to SO wanted the site to be something it fundamentally wasn't supposed to be; that it in fact specifically existed not to be, to provide an alternative, because the thing that everyone wants (a discussion forum) is actually bad.

When the site was launched, lots of people seemed to agree with Atwood and Spolsky that discussion forums are bad and that they knew better. But in the long run, this still proved to be a minority opinion, by a long shot.

In short, I don't acknowledge that it was a problem because it wasn't. It was expected and okay that lots of people didn't want to engage with the format. The format was not for them. The purpose of the format was to produce an artifact that would benefit them indirectly, for free, by improving Google search results (until Google fucked it up).

But the site (the platform itself, and the people implementing it; not the community) fucked up by failing to recognize that most people really do want a fundamentally unproductive, unfocused social environment (and a help desk!) after all.

More importantly, it fucked up by presenting a UI that misleads people into thinking they could have that experience (post a question and there's space for answers under it; obviously that means that people are answering directly for your benefit and not anyone else! and of course we can go back and forth about this, and they'll help me solve my problem! and there are votes, like Reddit!)