Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Blog
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Post History

77%
+5 −0
Q&A Add colors for font on all websites?

The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of ...

posted 4y ago by Lundin‭  ·  edited 4y ago by Lundin‭

Answer
#4: Post edited by user avatar Lundin‭ · 2021-02-04T15:12:46Z (almost 4 years ago)
  • The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ crayons in the box.
  • > The SO community are very good at self-policing, so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines
  • No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. SO has been doing edit reviews removing code formatting vandal edits for `random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting. Apparently I've done some 5000+ reviews over there so believe me when I say it's the same old story now as it was when the site was new.
  • _Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.
  • The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ the <font color="#00FF00">c</font><font color="#FF0000">r</font><font color="#0000FF">a</font><font color="#00F0F0">y</font><font color="#ff0ff0">o</font></font><font color="#FFFF00">n</font><font color="#c0c0c0">s</font> in the box.
  • > The SO community are very good at self-policing, so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines
  • No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. SO has been doing edit reviews removing code formatting vandal edits for `random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting. Apparently I've done some 5000+ reviews over there so believe me when I say it's the same old story now as it was when the site was new.
  • _Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.
#3: Post edited by user avatar Lundin‭ · 2021-02-04T15:03:13Z (almost 4 years ago)
  • The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ crayons in the box.
  • > so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines."
  • No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. Someplace Else has been doing edit reviews removing code formatting vandal edits for `random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting.
  • _Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.
  • The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ crayons in the box.
  • > The SO community are very good at self-policing, so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines
  • No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. SO has been doing edit reviews removing code formatting vandal edits for `random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting. Apparently I've done some 5000+ reviews over there so believe me when I say it's the same old story now as it was when the site was new.
  • _Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.
#2: Post edited by user avatar Lundin‭ · 2021-02-04T14:58:34Z (almost 4 years ago)
  • The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ crayons in the box.
  • > so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines."
  • No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. Someplace Else has been doing edit reviews removing `code formatting for random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting.
  • _Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.
  • The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ crayons in the box.
  • > so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines."
  • No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. Someplace Else has been doing edit reviews removing code formatting vandal edits for `random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting.
  • _Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.
#1: Initial revision by user avatar Lundin‭ · 2021-02-04T14:56:43Z (almost 4 years ago) 
The reason why this wasn't added on SO is because lots of people already struggle to use correct formatting for emphasis, using code formatting, quote format and weird crap like that. It's kind of like if you give a kid a box of new crayons. You can be sure that they will try out _all_ crayons in the box. 

> so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines." 

No, that never happens, they will _never_ learn. Someplace Else has been doing edit reviews removing `code formatting for random emphasis` for 10+ years and counting. 

_Besides, I believe that_ this _is the correct way to use emphasis inside text that is already italic_. At least that's how printed fiction in published books most often do it.