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 »
Q&A

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

54%
+4 −3
Q&A Triggers for cognitive biases for non native English speakers in this site as web-accessibility issues

I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica; this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange. I admit I was a bit lost with the site...

1 answer  ·  posted 4y ago by deleted user  ·  edited 3mo ago by meta user‭

Question discussion design
#9: Post edited by user avatar meta user‭ · 2024-02-28T17:03:23Z (3 months ago)
added a required tag
Triggers for cognitive biases for non native English speakers in this site as web-accessibility issues
I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.

---

I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.

English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.

## Meta versus non meta

I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image and ironically I didn't even notice that "Meta" text - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme towards it (I read "Codidact" with fear - fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which already confused several times; perhaps in the level of a typo).

Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.

I suggest to put links to all network sites (such as "Writing") directly under codidact.org as well as offering a link to Meta from there (it might be easy to navigate directly from browser URL like this - at least in some cases).

## Site suggestions

I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.

Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:

If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:

 > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.

1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange

## Amount of down votes

I got eleven down votes in about less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:

When one gets so many down votes in such a small time frame (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.

I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.

I already got about a 1,000 down votes and 750 upvotes on StackExchange so I know a bit about biases in voting.
#8: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-08T08:21:50Z (about 4 years ago)
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image and ironically I didn't even notice that "Meta" text - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme towards it (I read "Codidact" with fear - fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which already confused several times; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • I suggest to put links to all network sites (such as "Writing") directly under codidact.org as well as offering a link to Meta from there (it might be easy to navigate directly from browser URL like this - at least in some cases).
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I already got about a 1,000 down votes and 750 upvotes on StackExchange so I know a bit about biases in voting.
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image and ironically I didn't even notice that "Meta" text - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme towards it (I read "Codidact" with fear - fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which already confused several times; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • I suggest to put links to all network sites (such as "Writing") directly under codidact.org as well as offering a link to Meta from there (it might be easy to navigate directly from browser URL like this - at least in some cases).
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in about less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so many down votes in such a small time frame (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I already got about a 1,000 down votes and 750 upvotes on StackExchange so I know a bit about biases in voting.
#7: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-08T08:20:43Z (about 4 years ago)
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image and ironically I didn't even notice that "Meta" text - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme towards it (I read "Codidact" with fear - fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which already confused several times; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I already got about a 1,000 down votes and 750 upvotes on StackExchange so I know a bit about biases in voting.
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image and ironically I didn't even notice that "Meta" text - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme towards it (I read "Codidact" with fear - fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which already confused several times; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • I suggest to put links to all network sites (such as "Writing") directly under codidact.org as well as offering a link to Meta from there (it might be easy to navigate directly from browser URL like this - at least in some cases).
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I already got about a 1,000 down votes and 750 upvotes on StackExchange so I know a bit about biases in voting.
#6: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-08T03:13:37Z (about 4 years ago)
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image which I didn't even notice - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image and ironically I didn't even notice that "Meta" text - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme towards it (I read "Codidact" with fear - fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which already confused several times; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I already got about a 1,000 down votes and 750 upvotes on StackExchange so I know a bit about biases in voting.
#5: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-07T17:40:07Z (about 4 years ago)
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image which I didn't even notice - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse; in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image which I didn't even notice - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse; perhaps in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
#4: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-07T17:11:27Z (about 4 years ago)
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the Meta text which I didn't even notice because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse (in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the "Meta" text in the logo image which I didn't even notice - probably because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse; in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
#3: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-07T16:21:07Z (about 4 years ago)
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on 7 years of experience in StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the Meta text which I didn't even notice because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse (in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
  • I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on seven years of experience with StackExchange.
  • ---
  • I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.
  • English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.
  • ## Meta versus non meta
  • I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the Meta text which I didn't even notice because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse (in the level of a typo).
  • Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.
  • ## Site suggestions
  • I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.
  • Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:
  • If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:
  • > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.
  • 1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
  • 1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
  • 1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange
  • ## Amount of down votes
  • I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:
  • When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.
  • I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.
#2: Post edited by (deleted user) · 2020-05-07T16:19:38Z (about 4 years ago)
#1: Initial revision by (deleted user) · 2020-05-07T16:18:01Z (about 4 years ago)
I dedicate this post to ArtOfCode and Monica;<br> this is my "I welcome myself" post and I wrote it also based on 7 years of experience in StackExchange.

---

I admit I was a bit lost with the site by means of web accessibility.

English is not my first language so I am more prone to cognitive bias in English user interfaces.

## Meta versus non meta

I used Codidact "Meta" several days without even noticing it is different than the "non meta" part of the site; perhaps because I had to put much mental effort in reading the tiny "Codidact" text above the Meta text which I didn't even notice because the lack of a psychological scheme (I read it fearing I would confuse "Codidact" with "Codiduct" with which I often confuse (in the level of a typo).

Today I sat on the bus and executed "Codidact" on Google; I got to the main page which was different than the meta page and because I didn't know that what I used before was meta, I didn't understand I was at "non meta" and asked myself why is the site looks so different and said something might being edited and different parts of the site would be unified under one menu in some time.

## Site suggestions

I have suggested 3 new sites without realizing that I must suffice a "2 or more people crew" (or thus I _later_ understood) and thus got a total of eleven down votes.

Down votes are an important quality assurance mechanism but they could happen based on bias (either of the OP, the downvoter, or of both) and in this case, I believe, I was biased to mistake; to clarify:

If a user goes to Codidact meta and clicks on Site suggestions, shehe gets a message that currently has no special design, has no "Red background" ("Red point" principle in marketing of attendance-capturing or make-focusing), no bolding, and it says:

 > Post here to suggest a new site - if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here, we can host it for you.

1. I am not 100% sure I even noticed that; it might have slipped my mind.
1. I vaguely recall I did notice that but I might interpreted "if you've got a core group of users interested in having a site here we can host it for you" as "you may suggest and if your suggestions gets enough attention we start the site"
1. I might was biased from my 7 years of using StackExchange

## Amount of down votes

I got eleven down votes in less than a day and that appears about everywhere I go here (and possibly to everyone) and that's a bit strange for me and a bias by itself:

When one gets so much down votes (even if ironically based on a cognitive bias) it can bring bad emotion that further brings cognitive bias and further biases creating and editing content.

I think, we don't want so much negative emotion here.