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 Olin Lathrop
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #278722 |
Adding more formatting features to comments will only invite more abuse of comments. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278544 |
*"Our top fifty contributors will receive Codidact stickers!"* Do we even have 50 posts per week across all sites? It seems like much less to me. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278542 |
@Moshi: Sorry about getting attribution to you wrong. When you're editing a question, you can't see the comments anymore. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278542 |
Post edited: |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278542 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Suddenly need to sign in every visit In the last few days, something has changed so that I now have to sign in again every visit to Codidact. This is using the same browser on the same machine as before (Edge, Win 10) which worked fine previously. I think it was months since I had to sign in before. Yes, I have the "remember me" bo... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278494 |
Would you still care about auto-save being disabled if there were a "Cancel Changes" button? It seems to me that is the real issue. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278493 |
The last-seen time is for everyone else. It's something that users shouldn't be able to hide. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278505 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Future planning: what user preferences would be useful? status-declined I would like a way to disable Markdown by default in posts I write. The HTML formatting is richer, and it's what I use because I don't feel like having to remember yet another set of formatting syntaxes. One big disadvantage of Markdown is that it's too easy to trigger by acc... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278504 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Future planning: what user preferences would be useful? whether your votes are public or private by default I would probably use that, but it also shouldn't be a big deal to click the appropriate button at the time of voting. Maybe this is to make the immediate voting interface less cluttered, but there still has be a means to override the default at ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278487 |
You can just delete everything. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278476 |
This is usually built-into browsers. Alt left-arrow is pretty universal, there is often a left arrow near the top left corner, and also a menu entry somewhere. Do these not work for you somehow, or are you expecting every web page to have a go-back button? (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278438 |
@Moshi: Then they could just ask if I'm over 18, or whatever the relevant age threshold is. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278441 |
Post edited: |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278438 |
I couldn't get to the linked post on Discord. I thought I had an account there, but *after* making me go thru captchas, it would then tell me it didn't like my email address. When I tried to create a new account, it wouldn't proceed until I gave it my birth date. What the …!? I don't see a legiti... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278441 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: General discussion on making votes public I know this is not a popular stance, but I agree with you. I have seen first hand the problems caused by anonymous voting on SE, especially anonymous downvotes. Whenever there is a way to do any harm without being identified, vandals will do so, or it will be done for personal reasons and not the... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278404 |
Post edited: |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278404 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Proposal: tool for user-requested import of a single question and its answers from SE If you create such a feature, at least make it optional per site with the default off. I would be strongly opposed to any direct import from anywhere else to the Electrical Engineering site, for example. There is really no necessity for imports. If a user wants to bring over one of their own que... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278392 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Do we have/should we have community wikis? I have no real objection if others want a community wiki (or whatever it should be called) post type, but want to point out that these never really worked right on SE. I'm very unlikely to make of such a post type. I can see how it sounds nice at first glance, but take a look at some real example... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278353 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How should staff deal with posts critical of themselves that they want deleted? Unless something is clearly and directly abusive, let it go. Letting a trolling post get downvoted to oblivion is way better than any mod action of removing or otherwise censoring it. People know crap when they see it. Let them vote accordingly. Not only does that get around accusations of mods... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278234 |
@Moshi Right. I'm suggesting a squishy metric trading off the two. For example, you can get the ability with high accepted flag count and low contribution score, low accepted flag count and high contribution score, and combinations in between. The four limits should be settable by site. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278266 |
@Logician: You are apparently sorting by activity, not score. This question is at the top because it had the most recent activity. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278234 |
For example, someone that has read and answered a lot of questions should know how to tell good from bad questions. In fact, they are probably better at it than someone that had a few close/reopen/delete flags accepted. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278234 |
Much of this sounds reasonable, but it seems like the metric of generally writing well-received answers is getting lost except for the first ability you mention. Someone with lots of good answers is going to be familiar with the site and its norms. The should lower other thresholds to get specific ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278288 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Informing community users of new permissible features Please, no. With modern technology, we all get way too many nagware messages as it is. Let's not have Codidact add to that. It's easy enough to visit meta occasionally. And, there is already a mechanism to sign up for notifications for things like new questions. There is no problem to solve ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278204 |
Post edited: |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278206 |
You might decouple rep from privileges to some extent, but there still needs to be a single easy-to-see score for every user that indicates how much that user's contributions are valued by the community. The gamification of such a "awesomeness score" is important and must not be overlooked. Trust s... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278199 |
The real question is why some sites artificially cap rep at 1 or 0. Some people can make a net negative contribution. Rep should reflect that. If it were clipped at 0, then doing bad things don't count anymore after a while. That makes no sense. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278204 |
Post edited: |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278204 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Orientation / Welcoming Committee Should I just let loose and post every question I can't find an answer for? Absolutely not! You first need to understand the specific rules and norms of whatever site you want to ask on. Codidact is more about the individual sites than the organization, so help pages are mostly per-site. Th... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278181 |
-1, this is exactly the rules-lawyering we are trying to prevent. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278162 |
Even now, comments have an order, since some are in reply to others. Comments should definitely not be reordered. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277974 |
This should have been two questions since you made two separate proposals. I don't know how to vote on the question now since I agree with the first proposal, but not the second. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278087 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Should we show tags before the body, to provide context for reading the question? The real problem was that the question didn't provide it's own context well enough. Tags aren't content. They are only for filtering questions to what you want to view, in a search, etc. It is a misuse of tags to rely on them to provide important context to the question. Putting tags at the top... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278085 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How granular should network communities be? The main guiding principle should be what fraction of posts a typical user would find interesting, or at least feel are related enough to their interests to not be annoyed at them for being off-topic babble. Individual users will have a more narrow focus of interest than a whole site. They will g... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277949 |
Votes here on meta mean agreement/disagreement. The obvious interpretation of the downvotes is therefore "*I don't think this is a worthwhile feature*". (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277958 |
@Monica: I'd be fine with that too. I was just thinking this might be an easy mechanism to add signed votes to, implementation-wise. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277959 |
The proposed additional voting options are optional. If you don't want to be identified, nobody is forcing you. You only list problems with signed votes, but there are problems with unsigned votes too. Vandalism was certainly a problem on SE. It also sucks when your post is downvoted, but without... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277958 |
I generally agree, +1. Emojis are way overused today, and have gotten annoying as a result. I would like to see "signed" up and down votes added as a special mechanism. Instead of just saying *"I like this"*, it says *"I agree, this is correct, (or disagree, this is wrong) and am putting my reputa... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277957 |
@luap42: The point about the signed up and down votes is that they do more than just leave a comment. They should additionally effect the score of the post and the rep of the author more strongly than unsigned votes. That means some special handling needs to be implemented. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |