11

I'm not sure if this is even the right place; the whole beta launching process is very mysterious and it's not clear who's running the show. But anyway.

I'd like to request that when the site is launched it would use

re.stackexchange.com

instead of

reverseengineering.stackexchange.com

What can we do to achieve this?

EDIT: I don't really have a compelling case, but here's a few reasons:

  1. "RE" is a very common and well-understood abbreviation, at least among reverse-engineers
  2. There are already a few SE sites that use an abbreviation: DBA, RPG, GIS, DIY, UX. The last one I think is the closest to our case: a mostly "insider" abbreviation.
  3. As it stands, "reverseengineering" is the longest subdomain of all the SE sites. Even "game development" got shortened to "gamedev". It just looks unbalanced :)
10
  • 1
    Yes, that's the right place. But that doesn't normally happen. If you want the host name to be re instead of reverseengineering, you'll have to make a really compelling case. Why do you want that? Who types a URL manually anyway? Aren't you worried that re is ambiguous (a two-letter abbreviation could be a lot of things)?
    – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil'
    Mar 19, 2013 at 22:35
  • 2
    I do type my URLs regularly. (Though Opera's history auto-completion helps.)
    – Igor Skochinsky Mod
    Mar 19, 2013 at 22:36
  • 1
    I'm with @Igor... I would prefer re.*
    – JZeolla
    Mar 19, 2013 at 22:59
  • 1
    This seems sensible. And if not re.* it could be rev-engg.* just to make it more compact. Although re.* does sound to be the best domain name.
    – markovchain
    Mar 20, 2013 at 3:09
  • 1
    To be honest, I hear "re" and I think "regular expression".
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Mar 20, 2013 at 14:38
  • 2
    Or "reply" or "regarding" or "resident evil".
    – Aarthi
    Mar 20, 2013 at 14:51
  • @Aarthi To be fair, regarding.stackexchange.com would be pretty weird. :)
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Mar 20, 2013 at 15:09
  • 3
    @AnnaLear but residentevil.stackexchange.com would be awesome.
    – Aarthi
    Mar 20, 2013 at 15:23
  • Well, glad to see that my question brought out the big shots! It was kinda awkward with just us kids in the playground.
    – Igor Skochinsky Mod
    Mar 20, 2013 at 16:49
  • I'd prefer reversing.SE
    – CodesInChaos
    Nov 16, 2013 at 17:06

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
11

An obvious URL is a great URL. The more-descriptive name/subdomain choices are part of a movement towards simplifying where this information can be found. With the cacophony of abbreviations, aliases, and half-recognized vanity names floating around, it is becoming increasingly difficult to know where to find much of anything. This has to stop.

With smarter browsers, more clickable/touchable links, text completion, and social network connectivity, it is becoming increasingly rare to type in these domain names with any great frequency. If it creates a few extra keystrokes on occasion, it's a small tradeoff for discover-ability.

Consider search: If a user can look at the URL and make an accurate guess about the content of the page before ever reaching it, it brings people to your site. If they can remember how to get back there later, all the better.

These keywords and canonical use of names are important; they make the site discoverable, and they make sure everyone is referring to the site in the same way… and, yes, they're even recognized and preferred by the search engines.

4
  • Is that just an argument against my proposal or an official "No"? It kinda looks like the former but seeing as you have a diamond mark I guess it's the latter. Can you please state explicitly if that's the final, official answer?
    – Igor Skochinsky Mod
    Mar 20, 2013 at 16:46
  • 1
    @Igor I'm just participating in a discussion. These points are arguable and it doesn't necessarily serve anyone's interest to summarily slam down a binary decision before hearing what folks have to say. Sometimes it's helpful to point out the broader implications and to share why things work the way they do, while considering the possibility that sometimes I can be wrong.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Mar 20, 2013 at 17:05
  • Thanks for the clarification!
    – Igor Skochinsky Mod
    Mar 20, 2013 at 17:06
  • reverseengineering far too long and annoying to type.
    – CodesInChaos
    Nov 16, 2013 at 17:05
-1

rce.stackexchange.com would be even more obvious, but since the scope isn't limiting it to Reverse Code Engineering (RCE), I suppose that's out of the question.

RE, as in Reverse Engineering, is broader than just RCE and therefore I think the name as it is is in order. Although a bias towards RCE is visible in the existing questions.

1
  • 3
    I love downvotes without comments. They gimme this fuzzy feeling inside and they really help drive the discussion, too!
    – 0xC0000022L Mod
    Mar 28, 2013 at 18:38

You must log in to answer this question.

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