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.
Activity for pnuts
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #277926 |
@Moshi For something as minor as 'Staff' flags in the User List *I'd* be fine with quite a lot longer, while things are as busy as they are at present. BTW My apologies for the bother I caused you over a now deleted Q. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277926 |
@elgonzo I suspect anything other than a space immediately after 'username' (immediately following`@`) does not ping. (And two or more word usernames *might* need to have the spaces removed.) (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277379 |
Elsewhere you asked the very reasonable Q 'why -1 a [bug] Q' and gave this Q as an example. I can account for one -1 here. I acknowledge the screenshot complication but you have been offered possible ways forward (what further information from you might help) and have chosen not to provide any. A Q a... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277545 |
I suspect screenshots might help. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277926 |
"Meta's tags are mainly used as a way for the site builders and administrators to keep track of what is completed or not" [your](https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276831#answer-276832) words. A PR seems "job done" as far as a site builder is concerned. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277924 |
I'd prefer the tag be premature (provided only very slightly) rather than be overlooked altogether. For me "will be live the next time a deploy happens" is good enough clarification for a short period. I imagine coupling the tag with the PR action makes it less likely it will be forgotten. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277887 |
@Moshi Thank you (again!). Now with improved understanding, maybe in such cases *edit from* rather than *edit by* would be an adequate fix? I am fairly certain elsewhere this would be [status-bydesign]. BTW most of my suggested edits are neither "helpful" nor "declined" - there is also "pending". (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277904 |
So not a [bug] - perhaps a [feature-request]? (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277871 |
I've seen (even participated in) a number of disagreements over the topicality of Excel formulae over on SO but don't recall a single instance where there VBA was considered inherently off-topic. Some examples of what you found may be helpful, since I *do* see harm with overlapping scopes (if substan... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277887 |
Is "The site claims " correct, *strictly speaking*? There is a timestamp that I agree at least strongly *implies* that, but if when a proposal came into effect is useful information, it could be reasonable for a single stamp to favour 'implemented' over 'suggested'. Maybe there should be two stamps, ... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277408 |
I'm down voting because at least each of **file type**, **file size** and **file name** may be relevant, and you have not provided any of these details. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277858 |
@OlinLathrop Agreed. Mild concern is *a common "ideal", which both implementations strive for* (that's @luap42 20200707 on Discord about C# and Qpixel), and MVP was (s/h been?) consensus, whereas above looks unilateral. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277365 |
Current status seems harmless to me and given how much else seems to deserve priority, I'm down voting in the hope that that reduces attention here in favour of attention elsewhere, for the moment. [Here](https://meta.codidact.com/questions/277872) similar. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277858 |
Does MVP remain "We order answers by score, with newer answers winning ties." ? (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277859 |
@Moshi Thank you. That *does* make sense to me. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277859 |
@Moshi Neither *in-scope* nor *off-topic* - {} ? (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277859 |
Just because a quantifiable relationship between variables is recognised does not *for me* qualify a Q as "Maths". E.g. I know distance = speed x time but would expect "How long from JFK to LHR by Boeing 777" to be a travel Q, not a "Maths" one. Too wide a coverage may conflict with a lay person's in... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277553 |
Although tagged [discussion] the *I request* seems more like a [feature-request] to me and I downvoted as I see no reason to delay introduction of new communities because of reports of bugs that many users have been unable to reproduce. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277453 |
@M̶̡͓̘͖͍̟͍͎̰͕̯̎̂̊ȍ̵̀̐̎̇͝s̸̩̪̓̈́h̴͙̜̺̀̆͐̀͜i̷̧̧̩̹̦̯̲̒ There may be a price not worth paying (in speed etc) but for sure improper capitalisation sets a bad precedent for quality within the body of Qs and As. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277302 |
If asking for automatic removal of parent where child is present and if editing in a parent where child is [present](https://software.codidact.com/posts/277148/history) seems odd? (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277389 |
Obviously. I did write "**OR** last was active". SE claims ~20M users and I have not noticed a single objection to their "Last seen" times. When to revert is useful for (a) changing votes (b) deleting surplus Comments and (c) accelerating As, etc. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277389 |
If only "last active" the information is already provided, just could be tedious to find. For example, your A above is timed (36 minutes ago, at present). (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277020 |
@OlinLathrop a) since each Q competes with others for attention IMO there is a role for marketing and emotional appeal, or at least something similar. b) from a different Q&A site, but IMO relevant: "*Usually, I come here and start writing a question and by the time I've understood my own problem wel... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277096 |
IMO if https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276825 were addressed it would probably resolve this issue also. (ie a filter to allow selection of 'unanswered' only and also allow instead deselection of 'closed', each preferably with, optionally, tag specification as well.) (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277020 |
@OlinLathrop There are some insights into thought processes here: https://www.artchain.world/all/how-to-title-your-paintings/ and https://www.standoutbooks.com/choosing-your-title-first/ (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277023 |
@MonicaCellio More or less as I suspected :) - and definitely 'no big deal' either way but immediately under the Title makes more sense to me, and can reduce scrolling. Unfortunately there have been times (elsewhere) when Title and body have been totally incomprehensible without sight of the tags. ... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276940 |
@OlinLathrop Yes, I smiled at your suggestion and got the point that it was just an example but ran out of characters before clarifying that I was doubtful about the "ground" part. Ground beef Q on cooking.codidact is presently tagged just [beef] – ie no language issue with that. Given where this Q ... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276940 |
Unfortunately specific example happens to be complicated. Perhaps since *mincemeat* sounds like minced meat, in my UK experience *minced meat* is rarely used. I think just *mince* is more popular in speech – but, while likely to refer to beef, lamb and pork e.g. are other possibilities for both long ... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276780 |
IMO user53100's Comment is enough by way of 'improved' phrasing. That Comment and Q and other As express opinions (that move consideration forward), whereas 'sitting on the fence' adds next to no value. You don't have to be adamant, but what are **your** views on the issues you mention? I'd prefer an... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276832 |
Disallowed characters – similar to above. I don't mind whether or not there are any but, without good reason (eg all Greek characters disallowed in general but permitted on a language site) any exclusions should, unexceptionally, be the same for all sites. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276832 |
The symbol for imported is an example where I think "exceptional circumstances" applies. If there is a tag-quantity-per-question limit then that symbol should not count towards that limit. No spaces – good, maybe you will better understand what I am getting at. Would you mind if a site decided (witho... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276832 |
ie some users can and some can't, even if the qualification system varies between sites. Lower case or upper or mixed is fine, but mixed means more work, both manual and very likely automatic (so slower). Being limited for character number was not my point – my point was the limit should be the same ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276832 |
*Other sites may not want mod-only tags* damns the rationale for having them on other sites. I have never seen much need for mandatory tags, but to demand them on one site and not another makes no sense to me. If it makes no sense to others there will be confusion, and errors, and extra work and ill ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276832 |
Hierarchical, I think, excellent (I'd like the option for every site). Different tag sets, of course (by *basics of tagging* I meant to exclude actual tags, merely include "the system"). *Meta's tags are mainly used as a way for the site builders and administrators to keep track of what is completed*... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75053 |
Were this tagged [status-launched] (scientific-speculation.codidact acknowledged as meeting the idea) I would have upvoted, but instead have down voted as I think there is no room for two such similar sites here. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276539 |
I have up voted this A because my immediate reaction was to favour a separate category, and I appreciate the clarity of your expression. (Plus your last paragraph made me laugh.) However, I disagree with "Bug" as a separate category because I believe it is too much to expect general users to distingu... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #39514 |
I've down voted because without a 'status' tag and without a formal A after all this time the Q now seems irrelevant, and @ArtOfCode's comment seems to suggest it never was particulalry relevant. (Also, I don't see "Authenticate" in my account.) (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276755 |
@xtal I accept you are building case. I think the first time I saw "You were mentioned in a comment" was in connection with your comment above. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276755 |
@xtal *not always reliable* and *not going to add much clutter* - agreed. But full date stamps are shown with a click on "See all your notifications »". I wonder whether sorting "Active" might help instead/meanwhile if most are identical because As to the same Q. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276780 |
Clearly the Q&A format is not an ideal one for site proposals and I acknowledge rhetorical questions can have a role but I have down voted this post since I believe it is phrased in a far less constructive way than it might easily have been. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276813 |
Many thanks. Re 3. I have just now been able to upvote (a) this A and now (b) the Q here: https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276701). Re 1. I plan to try a Meta Q re a tag edit. Re 2. I plan to try a Meta Q for that also. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |