I found SO (over time) to give less and less useful information: the best information was always in the quasi-subjective questions. It's nice to know how to use something, but really, I want to understand why. The SO/SE theory is against those questions. I have 19K rep on SO, 5Kish on P.SE, and I barely contribute anymore.

So I am planning on creating a Slant account and experimenting when I get home.

I feel exactly the same way (not with the high rep you have, but a decent rep that I worked hard to cultivate in the past).

I think there are a good number of us who feel this way.

It is frustrating for a company to say it wants to "discover what its users are doing and enable it", and then to see that company squash so many individual pieces of excellent content those users have created.

I think people want the ability to do both, but there was a huge need for a better way to answer objective questions. In the pre-SO world, forums and bulletin boards served subjective questions mediocrely, but objective question abysmally.

Solving the objective question problem is and always has been SO's mission. It's a hard problem, and they solved it well- at least partially by firmly avoiding discussion questions.

So, while I think there's totally room and a need for a better solution to discussion questions (and there are several active attempts: discourse, slate, quora, etc), I hardly see it as a fault of SO's that they pushed away subjective questions.

Well you just made my day, thanks so much.

On the objective comment, the format actually does work for objective questions just fine without us changing anything. We just excel at subjective questions so thats how we are positioning ourselves.