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.

Profile Activity Vote Summary All Communities

Activity for Zerotime‭

Show all events Posts 46 Comments 68 Edits 6

Type	On...	Excerpt	Status	Date
Question	—	Post history is incomplete and misses some parts at random I posted the following question on Software Development: question on Software Development When I go to the history, only half of the history is showing: history of question on Software Development This is also true for my answer where some bits are missing and everything is completed diso... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #278215	@Mithrandir24601 I didn't read that in the current version (or missed it) and I certainly don't implicitly read it to be that. For me, it's seven or violating the the current version of the rules. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #278215	Post edited:	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #278215	@FoggyFinder Yes, that's right, I fixed that (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #278216	Initial revision	—	about 4 years ago
Answer	—	A: To be constructive, or not to be constructive, that is the question. I'm all in for using constructive in the Code of Conduct. In a comment to a previous answer, you wrote: > Although I still believe that using the word "constructive" in the code of conduct is not constructive (because it is highly subjective and in practice no one can question any of its interp... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #278215	Initial revision	—	about 4 years ago
Answer	—	A: Second Iteration of Drafting the Codidact Arbitration & Review Panel What will happen if there are not enough persons to reach the desired size of seven persons? I propose the following change (additions in bold): > The Panel consists of at most 7 members of the Codidact network, who are elected for two-year terms in the same manner as the community board positions... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #278171	I can reproduce this: I can't access the comments on any questions and answers I browse. Firefox, Windows 10. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #278036	Initial revision	—	about 4 years ago
Question	—	Should there be a forum-like place for the Codidact network? I would like to propose a place on the Codidact network where one can informally talk with other members of the network in a slower paced setting about off-topic stuff (for example movie recommendations, politics, gaming and whatever else someone has a desire to talk about). In this case, a slowe... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #278015	I asked something similar here: https://meta.codidact.com/questions/277177 So probably a duplicate question. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277990	A resource category might also be a good idea for collecting information about specific medical topics, for example basic anatomy, pregnancy or anything else. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277985	@MonicaCellio Yes, per-reference voting could indeed be too much. Maybe voting as a whole, commenting if there are questionable references and link them to curated lists? On a side note: Would you mind posting your idea about curated lists of credible and problematic references as an answer? I think ... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #277985	Initial revision	—	about 4 years ago
Answer	—	A: Medical science site Related to the proposal to introduce reactions for answers, I propose that there should be some way to rate sources of questions and answers in order to maintain quality. This could be done as proposed in the corresponding meta post with reactions that are written along the lines "Good references"... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277957	This is a nice idea. I can also think about a good implementation for a medical sciences site: buttons indicating if a source is good or bad. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277913	Oh, that came across the wrong way. I didn't mean what's similar but rather what you would like to see differently. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277913	Can you elaborate on this and provide some examples please? I would like to hear what you have on your mind. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277851	If you get them to upvote a proposal and it evens out the downvotes, we all know that the proposal is controversial but has users who would like to participate. If it's only downvoted, it's not apparent for the public that there may be users interested in participating. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277573	Well, I guess that depends on the person in question: If someone is personally bothered by something, they will act on it. If they aren't bothered by it, they most likely just ignore it. If I see a proposal that I think isn't helpful (for the time being) for the Codidact project, I would downvote it ... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #277836	Initial revision	—	about 4 years ago
Answer	—	A: Medical science site From comments and discussion on other posts here, I've seen that a disclaimer should be included. My proposal: > This site does not provide medical advice. Its purpose is to exchange information about medical sciences among interested persons. Information shared here may be incorrect and does not ... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277573	I think for the community proposal that most of the downvotes originate from the fact that a math community is in its definition phase. Your proposal covers some of the stuff proposed there and I guess most people don't see the need for two too similar communities right now. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #276997	@MonicaCellio Is there an update you can share with us? I'm slightly surprised to see Tabletop Games to be in the [status-definition] phase even though this proposal here seems to have received more attention / interaction (positive and critical alike). I do see the point in the concerns voiced here ... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Edit	Post #277567	Initial revision	—	about 4 years ago
Answer	—	A: Please postpone launching new communities. Besides the technical stuff, I think that postponing launching new communities would actually hinder the Codidact project altogether. The thing is that this network of sites is built to curate knowledge. Knowledge can only be curated when there are people to curate it. So in order to curate more k... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277565	@MonicaCellio My numbers also jumped, similar to the last time: from under 700 to over 800. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277544	The few times I tried to vote while not being logged in I got an error. Just tried and it was there (yet) again. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #276933	@mbomb007 I don't see the point, the site would be about scientific findings. Can you please provide some example questions cornering the topics you brought up? For example, there might be clear medical conditions when an abortion should be done in order to save the mother's life, regardless of ethic... (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277258	I think that the questions should be focused on medical aspects on sport, then they are on-topic. For example: "Does exercise A promote wear of my joints?" However, questions about dieting or workout plans are no good fit in my opinion. (more)	—	about 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277224	Can you propose a possible guideline on what is allowed and what is disallowed and some example questions, please? Maybe this makes it more clear what we're looking at. (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277224	I'm very unsure about this... When allowing it, it should be clearly defined what's on-topic and what's off-topic. The problem with making diagnoses via distance is often having not enough information (can't assess a broken leg without a x-ray image) and that you can't verify on this platform if the ... (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277177	@OlinLathrop @MonicaCellio I adapted my proposal and included both of your ideas. (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Edit	Post #277177	Post edited:	—	over 4 years ago
Edit	Post #277177	Initial revision	—	over 4 years ago
Question	—	Can comment input fields be vertically scalable? Everytime I write longer comments and exceed a certain amount of characters, the input field for comments becomes scrollable. However, the scrolling makes it very hard for me to find specific passages in my comment to change or rewrite them. I quickly lose the overview this way. Is it possible tha... (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277114	I don't think that it's a problem that people will still be asking about diagnoses, yes it may be annoying to close them, but that's all - no harm done. The validity of sources indeed is a problem, strictly speaking one medical professional wouldn't be enough either as this person can also be wrong. ... (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277105	I partly agree with the previous comment of @user53100. I think that basic questions related to human biology / biochemistry and pharmacology should be on-topic to a certain degree. As soon as it becomes purely about the chemical formulas and effects behind it, I think that a chemical or pharmacology... (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277088	@luap42 This works. Can you please add this as an answer? (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277088	@luap42 My question is only about analytics cookies not functional ones, sorry for the misunderstanding. (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277088	@luap42 I just opened Codidact in two different browsers (Edge and Firefox) in private mode with no add-ons with no data associated before the visit and I didn't get a link or pop up to control cookie settings. Where can I access it manually to change my preferences after setting them once, for examp... (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Edit	Post #277088	Initial revision	—	over 4 years ago
Question	—	How can I conveniently opt out of Codidact analytics? Since a few days, my Firefox add-on Privacy Badger shows me a new tracker originating from analytics.codidact.org. I read the privacy policy and it states that there is analytics going on to improve the site. However, I don't want to contribute to this effort as I don't like my data to be analysed... (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277007	I'd be interested in participating aswell, however my knowledge is primarily limited to probability and statistics. (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #277041	I like it, one quick question though: When I open the pull down menu, for a second I see a full time stamp like "2020-01-01T05:05:53" and so on before it transitions to "4 days ago" or "10 hours ago". Is this intended or is something not working on my end? (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #276999	This is exactly what I meant. Upvoting can mean both "Nice, I like it" and "Nice, I like to participate" so a basic way to measure actual user engagement / participation helps out a lot. (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Comment	Post #276997	I'm rather enthusiastic to participate and have a fair share of knowledge in some sub topics like cardiology, oncology, general risk factors and psychiatry. (more)	—	over 4 years ago
Edit	Post #276989	Initial revision	—	over 4 years ago
Question	—	What are the steps between community idea and community proposal? Inspired from this post asking what steps there are between proposal and launching a community, I would like to know what steps there are between an idea and a proposal. Right now, we have at least one community idea with a relatively high upvote count: Factual History (even higher than Cooking an... (more)	—	over 4 years ago