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 Lathropâ€
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278353 | Initial revision | — | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278288 | Initial revision | — | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278204 |
Post edited: |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278204 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278204 | Initial revision | — | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278181 |
-1, this is exactly the rules-lawyering we are trying to prevent. (more) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278087 | Initial revision | — | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278085 | Initial revision | — | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 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) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277957 |
This would also be a good place to add the signed up and down votes. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277954 |
@Moshi: Because there is not need since it's already solved, and the developers have better things to do. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277954 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Allow users to link more than one website in their profile. As you say: they have no way of doing so (outside of putting it in the info box) Since you can put any links you want within your arbitrary info text, there is no problem to solve here. You can look at my profile as an example of this in action. I included a link to my resume in the info t... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277943 |
Trying to communicate this level of detail with tags is pointless. Its would mostly be busy-work for the developers, and provide very little useful actionable information to the users. Let's not make things difficult for the volunteers that are developing this software. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277926 |
*are you fine with "a little delay" of a couple days?* Certainly. Even longer is fine usually, once we know the feature has been added or bug fixed, and it's just a matter of getting thru the pipeline. This is especially true for trivial features like the one you linked to in your question. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277926 |
I can live with a little delay in the interest of making things easier for the developers, -1. While not perfect, Status-Completed when the code has been changed is good enough for me. Otherwise, the developers have to remember to come back to find outstanding "Code-updated" (or whatever) and chang... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277887 |
Thanks for posting this. I saw the activity too, then went looking for what change, but couldn't find it. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277868 |
Ah, so you mean like those crossing light buttons that do nothing. Eventually the lights change so that you can cross anyway. But really, the auto-save is pretty quick. I think you'd have a hard time making a change, then scrolling down to a SAVE button and clicking it before the system did it for... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277875 |
I like your out of the box thinking, but I wouldn't want commenters to essentially litter my perfect post with little icons all over the place. I agree comments should be short and not too visually cluttering. How about the *quote* feature would only write the text in italics or different font, may... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277858 |
@pnuts: That would be favoring newer answers. The system should strive to not add bias to the voting. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277868 |
The draft saving is almost immediate. What would be the point? (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277872 |
I've used italics for this purpose. Seems to work well enough and doesn't eat up a lot of space or add visual clutter like a blockquote would. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277855 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Randomize order of answers with same score Answers are shown in order according to their score derived from their votes. However, for answers with the same score, they seem to be shown in chronological order of creation time. This tends to "feature" earlier answers higher than later answers, even if the later answers have been rated the sam... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277577 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277577 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277568 |
References to images not hosted here shouldn't be allowed in the first place. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277574 |
Voting on people's ideas for new features means you get a consensus of whether the users as a whole would want these new features. That's quite useful. Dev time is limited. It should be spent creating features people actually want. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277577 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: I cannot understand the meaning of some downvotes why should anyone downvote a community proposal, like this post? Because they think it's a flawed proposal. That really should have been obvious. In the particular case you cite, note that you got many responses disagreeing with lumping physics and math together. I didn't vote at all, but if... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277567 |
I basically agree, +1. However, we need to be careful to make sure there are committed people behind each new community. Having a ghost town is worse than having nothing at all. The Photography site is a good example. People will come by, see the community is dead, and probably not come back. If... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277538 |
What is "FR"? I know of no such standard abbreviation. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |