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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #284937 |
I logged out and could see the deleted answer also. It did have the red background, and it did say "deleted", but I could still clearly see it. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284524 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Reacting without signing in error Even better, don't show the vote triangles or the "react" link if you're not logged in. Then there is no issue of an error message. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284523 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Question | — |
Require title for comment thread The title of a comment thread currently defaults to the start of the comment text. That has lead to a lot of partial-sentence comments visible below a post without comments expanded. Those look messy and are annoying, since you often can't tell at a glance what the comment is about. These titles ca... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284482 |
Whenever you bump into the comment length limit, you should be seriously asking yourself whether what you are writing should really be a comment. Most likely it shouldn't. Or, you need to learn to be more to the point. Comments are not for content. Pointing out an issue to an author shouldn't tak... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284491 |
Maybe for some people, they dump out a message, then go back and think what a summary of that message is. That's not how I think of writing a message, and from comments here, a decent number of others don't write like that either. I know what I want to say, else I wouldn't click on "start new comme... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
I can get behind the general idea, but I think the details need some tweaking. Votes on any one single post aren't that meaninful as a measure of the user overall. Put another way, there is some noise on individual readings. We want to know the recent trend, not over-react to one-off blips. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284435 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Split any question post with two or more questions into several posts (per the number of questions) and attribute it to the asker Some questions are closely related, and therefore are better combined in a single question post. Answering such individual questions separately would be more trouble, would likely require duplicate work, and possibly cross-references to the other related questions or their answers. It is the ques... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284433 |
Post edited: |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284433 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Split any question post with two or more questions into several posts (per the number of questions) and attribute it to the asker We are not here to clean up behind authors. More importantly, we shouldn't ever make substantive changes to the posts of others. Authors will be judged, positively or negatively, on what they write and how they write it. You can make suggestions to authors about improving posts, but the authors ... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282433 |
-1 for the poorly written post. I'm not necessarily for or against such a Codidact site (if it can be sustained, I'm fine with it), but am solidly against post missing critical content here. You are using a single link to define the site you want. Not gonna follow a link, just downvote instead. E... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282764 |
The Outdoors site would take questions on the use and maintenance of weapons for hunting. Military use and history would be off topic. I'm not saying this is a good proposal, but only some of what seems to be proposed here would apply to the Outdoors site. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282764 |
What's a "r/warcollege" and "r/credibledefense"? We shouldn't have to go hunting for descriptions. Key descriptions belong right here in your question. Put another way, posts here must be self-contained, at least for the key points. You have essentially written a link-only question. It should be... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284371 |
+1 just for the first bullet! (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284331 |
+1. Nannyware is annoying, no matter how well intentioned. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284143 |
This is somewhat of an aside, but 2 Mb is absurdly large to allow for a profile picture. It seems that the largest this picture is ever displayed at is 240 x 240 pixels on your profile page. Even completely uncompressed and 3 bytes/pixel, that only comes out to 0.17 Mb. There may be some point in ... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284047 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Can we please stop linkifying random strings that happen to look like domain names? I agree. This is a great example of over-reaching with trying to be "helpful" automatically. Only links explicitly declared so by the author should be shown as links. The site otherwise has no business guessing author intent. If a post author forgets or otherwise doesn't properly declare a link... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283997 |
Post edited: |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283997 |
Post edited: |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283997 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Show more threaded comments after clicking the title of a threaded discussion I agree. Once I've said I want to see the thread, show me the thread. Systems that try to automatically do something clever inevitably end up being more trouble than they are worth. Showing me some of the comments, especially other than the first N, is going to be confusing. Just show them all.... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283928 |
Yes, the mechanics of closing is as you say. However, the act of closing has other purposes. It basically says <i>"This is crap"</i>. With the added messages of <i>"We will continue to publicly declare this as crap until you fix it"</i>, or <i>"Fix it or else"</i>, with the "or else" being the imp... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277432 |
It would help to know exactly what you mean by these "favicons", and how exactly you expect them to be used. Where would they show up? Who is supposed to see them? What are they supposed to tell people? (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283801 |
Yes, to put it bluntly (since you asked), I downvoted your suggestion because you are asking for an unnecessary feature from the system because you got caught being sloppy. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283801 |
Yes, you have a history of posts that are annoying to read because of the bad English. Again, I realize this may not be your fault. However, that doesn't change the end result, which is ultimately all that matters.
This isn't the place for a detailed critique. If you want one, ask about it in t... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283808 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: I suggest to better format the title ("summarize your post with a title") area There is nothing broken here, and nothing to fix or change. Anyone can make a typo, forget to finish the title, or delete a piece of it by accident. That wasn't the problem. The real problem was that you obviously didn't look over the post after submitting it. Even the most minimal proofreadi... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283801 |
I was one of the downvoters. Yes, the blatantly broken title made me immediately dislike the post. It would have needed to be a stellar post to recover. It wasn't. It seemed to be largely a bunch of disorganized thoughts with it not obvious what the question actually was. This was not helped by ... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279062 |
Your basic premise is flawed. Just because most of us have to deal a particular thing in our lives, doesn't mean we *need* a Codidact community for it. We all drink water and walk far more often than do accounting. By this logic, we "need" communities about water and walking. Clearly this is absu... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283402 | Initial revision | — | over 3 years ago |
| Question | — |
Can't edit comment title. I wrote a comment and forgot to give it a title (It doesn't help that the title is entered below the comment, but that's another issue). The title shown is then just the start of the comment, which looks ugly. When I went to fix that, I couldn't find a way to edit the title, only the body of the co... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283026 | Initial revision | — | over 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Electronic Gadgets: Revival as "Mobile Devices" What you describe is already on topic at Power Users. Since that site is not overwhelmed with questions about smart phones and tablets (what you actually appear to mean by "mobile devices"), there is no point at this time to create a separate site for this more narrow topic. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283013 |
What is SVG? (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283024 | Initial revision | — | over 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How important reference is? References give credibility to facts you present in a post. It is up to you as the post author how credible you want to make your facts, versus how much trouble you want to go thru for that credibility. There are various factors that effect the credibility of a statement in the minds of your read... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282947 |
Post edited: |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282947 |
Post edited: |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282947 |
Post edited: |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282947 | Initial revision | — | over 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How can I effortlessly spawn new, unused URLs to the same question on Codidact? I'm not familiar with Reddit, and don't know what you mean by "submit links". However, it seems this other site has certain rules, and your question here is about how to circumvent them. You have no right to do that. Whether you think the rules are silly or not, it's their call to make. Think a... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282571 |
Post edited: |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282571 | Initial revision | — | over 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: The homework dumps are coming - how about a network-wide policy? Response to homework dumps should be site-specific. On Electrical Engineering, we addressed this up front by explicitly mentioning homework in the Allowed Topics help file (See the very last bullet at the bottom of that page). So far we haven't had enough of a problem so that an official policy t... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282502 |
It doesn't matter much what others are doing, and we don't want to chase around to 5 different web sites to get the spec of what you are proposing *here*. Describe your proposed site **here** in full. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282240 |
Since your one-line description of this proposed site is outward-facing, you should use the terms the general public will understand. It seems you intend this site to be for games you play on a computer, so "Computer Games" or some such makes more sense than "Video Games". To me, the latter is some... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |