The night before you posted this, I had a long conversation with [Gabe](http://pt.stackoverflow.com/users/12/gabe) (my co-worker) about an attitude he keeps encountering on pt.stackoverflow.com: certain types of questions seem to spark an immediate, visceral reaction from some members, even when they aren't attracting problematic answers or otherwise causing harm. He was frustrated, because in most cases these same folk are *very* helpful to others on the site, answering questions and helping new folks improve their work when their first attempts are lacking. 

We talked about this for a while, reviewing the relevant discussions and reflecting on our own experiences in similar situations, trying to ascertain what was triggering this reaction. Slowly, it dawned on us...

##Fear

When you've witnessed a situation go badly wrong, the memory of it tends to stick with you. "Once burned, twice shy" as the saying goes. And who here hasn't seen a site overrun by lousy questions, rude/demanding askers, off-topic discussions and trolls willing to soak up every last ounce of goodwill? Perhaps that's even what brought you here in the first place, and if so it's only natural to be wary of the same thing happening again to Server Fault.

**Being wary is *good*.** It lets you recognize when an interaction is leading to problems, when a user is clearly participating in bad faith, when a question is sucking up others' time with little hope of ever being resolved. Caution is born of experience, and it is the collective experience of its members that *makes* this site. 

But **fear** is something else. Fear doesn't wait for indications of a problem; it jumps at shadows, lashes out at memories. Caution avoids a question because the problem is unclear; fear screams at the asker because he might be a vampire. Caution leads us to make changes carefully while examining the consequences; fear leads to paralysis and [politician's logic][1].

When I look around at the discussions here, at the debates over how to handle the (very real) problems this site is facing, at the angry reactions to questions that could trivially be fixed or discarded... I see legitimate concern, but also a great deal of fear. Fear of outsiders. Fear of insiders. Fear of being overruled and fear of being abandoned. 

##Don't be afraid to be helpful

**Your call to action is admirable**; I would *love* to see everyone here rise to the challenge. But if you are to do so, you must first overcome your fear:

1. **Don't fear negative reactions from those whose work is criticized.** Be honest and civil in your critique, focusing on the problems you hope to see corrected rather than the author who created them. If it happens that you've cast your pearls before swine, then call upon the moderators to stop them from trampling you. 

2. **Don't fear that your edit will inadvertently deviate from the author's intent.** If you edit in good faith, according to your best interpretation of the author's intentions, then it will be easy for them to correct inaccuracies should you err. [A substantive edit][2] that salvages a poorly-written post can prove invaluable for both the author *and* those who come after; a timid edit just wastes your time.

<!-- -->

4. **Don't fear that you may inadvertently help someone who ended up in the wrong place.** If you write your answer to be useful to your peers, then it may well be of service to such *even if the asker is not among them!*



  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism
  [2]: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/04/in-defense-of-editing/