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.
Which communities have shown interest?
Historical note: When this post was written, we planned to use the QPixel software as a stopgap while building a new Codidact platform from scratch. That's not what we ended up doing. Since early in 2020 we have instead been evolving the original QPixel code. Discussion in this post about migrating from QPixel to Codidact is obsolete now.
--
QPixel is not Codidact, yet, and so we're not yet trying to "build all the things" (communities). But some communities on SE seem eager to move even to a temporary site, and one already has. Which communities are looking to move, and what do we know about them? Are there particular users we should talk with? Meta posts where they've discussed moving?
Please use this question to record what we know about candidate communities, so we can collectively figure out logistics, timing, etc. (It's probably better to add communities one at a time, for instance.)
For communities that want to know more
Thank you for your interest! The site you're viewing is built on QPixel, a project that started as more of an SE clone. It doesn't have all of SE's features, but it has the basics, enough to start building out your site either with imported content or from scratch.
We are modifying QPixel to become Codidact in the future. Codidact will have some important differences from SE, because we've learned a lot in a decade+ of using SE about where communities have encountered friction. Some types of content don't fit SE's Q&A format as-is -- for sandboxes, code-golfing, critiques, canonical posts, and others, communities have had to twist things to make them work. And for some communities, baked-in SE features like specific close reasons or comment-handling pose challenges. Codidact is building a richer toolbox so each community can build the site it needs. You'll see these features appear gradually on your sites here, as we implement them.
Some things will change as we move this platform toward the Codidact vision. Privileges will be tied to your activity rather than basing everything off a single reputation number. Answer scoring will be a little different, designed to favor consensus over controversy. Meta will work a little differently. We think these changes are for the better, we don't expect them to be alarming, and Codidact team members will assist with the transition and be on hand to answer questions. We'll keep working toward the Codidact Vision.
Please use QPixel to build your site with confidence that you'll be able to make a smooth transition to Codidact when it's ready. In the unlikely event that you decide you prefer QPixel to Codidact, no problem -- QPixel is open-source so you can take it and your data, and we'll help you set up your own server. We think you're going to prefer Codidact, though.
Please use this Meta site if you have questions or concerns. Or if you want to get more involved in building Codidact, visit codidact.org.
Speculative Science The scope of Worldbuilding.SE is very broad, ranging from hard-science questions about orbital me …
4y ago
Outdoors.SE has had some interest in moving away from SE, - - and the site has kind of ground to a halt afte …
4y ago
Namaskar! Well, I don't have such a critical dissatisfaction with Stack Exchange, probably because I interacted with …
1y ago
3 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Namaskar!
Well, I don't have such a critical dissatisfaction with Stack Exchange, probably because I interacted with SE (employees or CMs) very little, and the recent changes in SE policies have not much affected the site I moderate. Indeed, I am a Moderator Pro Tempore on Hinduism Stack Exchange!
The primary reason behind my interest in Codidact, is "It is Free and Opensource". I insist and prefer FLOSS over proprietary software. I have been looking for a FOSS Q/A platform for a long time, ever since I joined Stack Exchange (March 2014), and after getting aware of GNU's software freedom philosophy (Nov. 2014). I am aware of one FOSS QA platform: AskBot, which is used by Libreoffice and others, but I never thought about, and/or put effort into starting Q/A communities through it.
I do not know how new communities can be proposed or started on Codidact (e.g on Stack Exchange, there is Area51). If it will be feasible in the future, I would like to see two new communities, namely: GNU/Linux and Hinduism :)
Outdoors.SE has had some interest in moving away from SE,
- https://outdoors.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1611/what-is-status-of-efforts-that-were-started-during-the-mess-to-create-a-new-patf
- https://outdoors.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1601/request-for-thoughts-on-what-to-do-now-pros-and-cons-of-staying-or-leaving
and the site has kind of ground to a halt after the mess, we lost plenty of our most active users and there has been very little activity among the regulars who are still around. It seems like people have lost motivation for site-building which is very understandable.
I would prefer migrating sooner than later and I think there would be a number of users who would be willing to move to QPixel.
Speculative Science
The scope of Worldbuilding.SE is very broad, ranging from hard-science questions about orbital mechanics to questions about the design of magical creatures. Some users from there have been discussing a more science-focused community here. It's still about worldbuilding, in the sense that questions are about things that don't necessarily exist in our world, but it'd focus more on science than pure imagination in its speculative questions.
This community would need data import that's more expressive than what's been done on Writing and Outdoors -- specific tags, but also excluding specific tags -- so a question that is tagged both "biology" and "magic" would be excluded. The community might want to do a later round of data import if that's feasible -- so, start with high-value tags and then see what else to pull in.
This community would probably use categories to create a sandbox, once categories are available. A blog or wiki is also possible.
0 comment threads
1 comment thread