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 Peter Cooper Jr.
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #282240 |
I'm not active on Arqade.SE, so I don't know what "Many of the topics in Arqade are allowed here, even including certain policies when asking about questions" exactly means. Would asking for video game recommendations be on topic? Would asking for more people to join an online game be on topic? I sus... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282242 |
I sometimes get a chance to play video games, and would probably participate in this community casually on occasion. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282240 |
The term "gaming" by itself brings very different things to mind for different people: Some think of tabletop (physical card/board/roleplaying/etc.) games, some think of video games like you do, and some think of gambling (casinos/poker/etc.). Of course, there's some overlap with board games that can... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276994 |
I just added a `(VTT)` in my proposal to help people understand the acronym. Games and discussion thereof tend to have a *lot* of jargon. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275836 |
Post edited: Adding acronym for VTT and expanding out acronym for LARP |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275836 |
@corporat You mean, would questions on how to script some particular behavior in Roll20 or Anydice to implement an RPG mechanic or whatever be on topic? My initial inclination is sure, why not, especially if a community develops that could answer them. I'm by no means wanting to be the on-topicness-d... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276994 |
@Quintec I don't think you're "a bit late", we're all just pretty much waiting around for people just like you to come and join! (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280563 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Site for office suites This might need some clarification around what it means to be in an "Office Suite". Some people would consider Microsoft Office to include OneDrive, Teams, and their hosted Exchange product. The current proposal says that it includes a subset of Google's G Suite but some people might not consider GMa... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280494 |
Your specific question seems really broad, and is assuming some concept of "role" that not all tabletop RPGs share. Given some specifics, and if it could work for a human-mediated game (even one primarily played through an electronic platform), then I think it could be made to fit. Others might disag... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280494 |
Just to be clear, you're talking about developing a *video game* RPG, right? I think questions about developing tabletop RPGs and game design around that would fit, but I'm not sure about video game rules design. Some might fit (if say, it's a question that could apply to tabletop game design as well... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275836 |
I've also just added a section on desired technical features for the community. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275836 |
Post edited: Adding section on desired technical features |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280403 |
@ArtOfCode Hmm, maybe. In terms of technical changes I was thinking more of an "I'm working on an answer" button of some sort, which might handle cases where I'm doing research but haven't yet started formulating an answer. But having a standard just be starting a draft just might be good enough. I'd... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275836 |
I've added a proposed summary (per the needs-summary tag), changed LARPs to be explicitly on-topic (along with play-by-post style that I thought of as being on-topic but wasn't clear on), and (per suggestion of @tommi) added history and terminology to the on-topic list. (I don't know what is meant by... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275836 |
Post edited: Adding summary; making LARPs (and play-by-post style), history, & terminology explicitly on-topic |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280403 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How can we make Codidact more friendly for askers? This is very half-baked and just brainstorming at the moment, but it'd be good if askers received some sort of feedback that people were working on responding to them. Right now, some questions sit at zero answers for some time, and it can be hard to know if it's because the question is really hard, ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280225 |
Is there a group of people from Reddit that are looking to move to a different platform and are considering Codidact? I think this kind of community *could* be interesting if it gets a critical mass of people, but I'm not sure how it's going to get them since it looks really broad. Is the goal to col... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278544 |
Definitely be sure to check your spam folder. Microsoft's Exchange Online Protection definitely didn't like the message. Not sure if the line about "too good to be true" might have made it seem less reliable to their computers. :) But thank you! (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279964 |
I think it's also worth noting that the "skill" needed to answer (and thus the number of enthusiasts & casual visitors who can readily contribute answers) likely varies by topic. Christianity.codidact has had several questions sitting around for a long time with no answers, I suspect in part because ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279729 |
I might go so far as to call it a duplicate. :) Thanks for pointing it out; apparently my searching before posting this wasn't thorough enough. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #279729 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
What order should the sites be in? So if one looks at the list of Codidact communities, either on the main https://codidact.com/ page or in the footer at the bottom of every community's page, the list doesn't seem to be in a useful order. I'm thinking it's the order that the community was added, which probably isn't that helpful for b... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278495 |
I don't know if there's easy support in browsers, but it might be nice to have an even more WYSIWYG option and have code blocks automatically monospace with non-code areas proportional. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #279693 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Future planning: what user preferences would be useful? status-completed Be able to not have default licenses This is related to being able to pick a default per category, but what I'd actually like is the option to not have the License filled-in at all, and force me to explicitly pick it for each post. That is, each time I write something I want to... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279390 |
@Wikis Well, I partly just didn't want to overlap with Writing and Speculative Science, and I think the intent would mainly asking questions about other peoples' work rather than on how to create works of ones own. Maybe that idea doesn't need to be in the name, though, just in how the community ends... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Can we allow answerers to see if asker upvoted them? When someone takes the time to answer a question, it's nice for that person to feel recognized and that they were helpful. While seeing upvotes is a good indication that the answer was helpful to the community in general, there's not any indication that the answer was specifically helpful to the pers... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #279480 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Second Iteration of Drafting the Codidact Arbitration & Review Panel A thought not really on the content, but on the structure: It might be good to have some way to easily insert new Articles, within Titles, without needing contortions like calling something Article 25AA½ or whatever to try to get items within an existing Title. Usual ways I've seen for this in doc... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279390 |
Maybe something like "Published Fiction"? I'm assuming you don't want to include stories I'm coming up with myself (which would be more likely to go on Writing or Speculative Science), and while I don't want to nitpick what counts as "published" I think including some terms along those lines gets ac... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279372 |
@Lundin Just to argue the other side, it can be really hard to define "fantasy" without suddenly realizing you're encompassing all of fiction. And it's really frustrating to have questions and not sure where to get answers, with just "it's off topic here" being a reason to not get them even where the... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278884 |
@Nathaniel. Hmm, thanks. I guess I'm thinking of asking questions where I do want to see the wide range of interpretations and would want voting to be on what makes the most sense of a passage, as opposed to questions specifically asking for some specific tradition's view. For the latter I definitely... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279001 |
Is there an existing community at one of those places that's looking for a new platform? Are there people who are likely to stick around to try to answer these kinds of questions? (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278853 |
It may also be helpful to describe just what exactly someone is "signing up" to support if they agree to participate. Is that promising to visit the site some number of times daily/weekly/etc. for some number of weeks/months/years and vote on what they see? Is that promising to write some number of q... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278884 |
@curiousdannii I guess it's that I think of "citing one's sources" (of whether it's your own thinking/interpretation or that of someone else) as being part of an answer, rather than part of what a question is asking for? Again it's probably since I wasn't active on the respective SE sites, but is the... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278894 |
There are plenty of scripts that people use for names that I don't know how to pronounce, and plenty of ways to use Latin characters in ways that aren't pronounceable or that might cause confusion with other users. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278963 |
I'm just brainstorming alongside you; please don't take any of my comments as criticism. I *do* like the idea, I'm just trying to figure out how to help it succeed. I think a big list of initially on-topic and off-topic example questions would be helpful for defining the scope. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278963 |
It just might be easier and run into less legal issues if the focus is on understanding the laws and how to comply rather than questions that might be likely to be about skirting laws. I'm no lawyer, though, and maybe trying to answer legal questions is a bigger minefield? (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278963 |
@luap42 Thanks for your answers. I wonder if might make sense to try to start with a narrower scope of e-privacy (maybe just related to privacy laws like GDPR/CCPA/etc.), and make clear if you're looking for questions from the consumer's point of view or the company's or both. And then maybe broaden ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278884 |
I have to say that I didn't quite understand the difference between the Christianity and Hermeneutics site, though my interaction with them was mostly when something popped up on HNQ. (I think I asked one question on one of them once.) I think it makes sense for questions to get answers both from wha... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278963 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: A Site for Privacy and Data Protection Enthusiasts This is certainly a topic I'm interested in (I suppose I could be described as a "Privacy Enthusiast"), but I'm trying to understand exactly what kinds of questions and answers (and answerers, most importantly) this is going to try to attract. Is this primarily about online privacy, or also about bei... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278853 |
I also think we could do some standardization of wanting some "good example questions" ahead of time (like Area51.SE required), and probably even some "off-topic example questions" (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278853 |
As someone who *really* wants an RPG community, I agree that we don't yet have enough people to take off. For any community, we don't just need "participants", we need "answerers" and other people willing to write high-quality content regularly. It's a big commitment, really. For many communities her... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278852 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
What criteria are used to determine to launch a new community? Codidact currently has several communities (with varying levels of activity), and several more proposals for new communities. There seems to be an effort in many of these proposals to collect users to ensure that there's enough interest before launching a new site. This makes sense, because an empty ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278833 |
Maybe something like "Power User"? (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278775 |
Might this end up being something like AskReddit? I could see *some* sort of "general chat" being fun and maybe even useful, but I think this needs a way of describing what kinds of answerers it's hoping to attract and how to attract them, and just generally more details beyond "any question ever". (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |