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 Trilarionâ€
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #282242 |
From all the proposals that are currently not live, I could imagine this one has the highest chances to actually take off. Gaming is a hobby that many people share and I believe many active users from other CD sites would be able to contribute somehow. So maybe if in early 2022, we want to risk that,... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285264 |
@#53919 These numbers (1 against 3) on Linux Systems are really low. I hope the number of active Linux Systems users is a bit higher. Also there is no real proposal. Nobody knows how the merged site could look like. If somebody would make such a proposal it might be that the 1-2 users on Linux System... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276569 |
See also [The Codidact Foundation: now with added bank accounts! ](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/284688) (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282538 |
I would have a couple of questions about architecture, but I'm not sure they are all art related. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276754 |
The question is a bit why people want to follow some piece of content? To be notified of new answers maybe? I think something like bookmarking would be more interesting. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277244 |
I like the idea a lot, especial with screens becoming wider and wider over the years, there is lots of unused space. It might be something dependent on the width of the available viewport(?). (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285264 |
Definitely. With "concerns in survey questions should be addressed" I also meant to include your things. This answer is more thought of as where we are in the process of a merge and how we should proceed when the current issues are resolved. There shouldn't be any voting now. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285249 |
Why should Q&A + Meta = Comments?? Must be buggy. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285219 |
From a programming point of view one could call the toggle a filter and do probably a lot of good things with it, for example excluding closed questions, badly scoring questions or tags or questions with answers... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
@#8046 Okay, so until this feature here is implemented, if I encounter a question that may be not useful (and is closed and not a duplicate), should I (a) flag for moderator attention and request deletion or (b) do nothing because moderators would have deleted it already if they agree or (c) start di... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
@#8046 "We can have general rules for post deletion across the whole network without disrupting specific community rules." Maybe this was already discussed somewhere else or could be its own Q&A but I'm not sure I understand how the interplay of this Meta and the metas of all communities is supposed ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285189 |
I can also confirm that it works. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
@#8176 If you have 99 upvotes and one downvote, then the Wilson score is 101/104 which is almost 99/100. So yes, also with the Wilson score a downvote on lots of upvotes weighs approximately the same as any other vote. Only for small number of total votes (say less than 20 votes in total) the weight ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
Nice idea. But at least we should monitor the search hits / visits, which requires support for that by the software. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
I agree. I didn't mean it as a limiting step but rather as a gentle push to delete even more. There are questions that would fullfill your criteria (for example those linked in the question) that are still shown. Moderators can already remove (or hide) questions, I hope? (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
A more complex solution could be: monitor duplicates for a while and remove those that do not get enough search hits, for example keep only max 2 or 3 of the duplicates with the highest current rate of search hits. And additionally do not display score for duplicate, nor allow voting on duplicates. T... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
Maybe score < 0.3 would be similar (not exactly the same because Wilson score is not proportional to upvotes - downvotes. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
...manual removal of the content that matches these criteria by moderators maybe? (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
Duplicates may have a negative score and no answer but may be kept as search magnets. Maybe add "duplicates are not automatically deleted currently". (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278171 |
Is the issue still happening? If not, maybe it was fixed in the mean time and stats-completed could be added. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279076 |
I can only say that the chosen layout here is unexpected. My approach to writing questions is a bit iterative, i.e. I keep coming back to title and body and iteratively improve them until I'm satisfied. I need a temporary title at the beginning because that is in my mind when clicking the Ask questio... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285146 |
Yes, I see. :) Very nice to be able to read about the history. One could convert the history here into a community wiki article post on Q&A that will be constantly added to. For a Wikipedia article it's a bit too detailed, relative to the importance of the subject, I guess. Wikipedia editors would pr... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279076 |
Title after body is also the one thing that irritated me most when starting here. One can get used to it, but most people probably expect title above body because that most closely resembles the final order. Often enough I first write a preliminary title, then the body and finally return to the title... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278316 |
"I would prefer to post questions in Codidact than on Stack Exchange" Since you can do both (as stated by many answers here) why not doing Codidact first and Stack Exchange later and only if you are not satisfied with the answers here. That way you can support this platform with only losing a bit of ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285134 |
@#8046 Thanks for the suggestion. Will look at the GH issues. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285146 |
Wikipedia pages often have a history section. Inspired by this I searched for a publicly written history of Codidact (at least when it was founded). I found nothing on the codidact.org site. Maybe under "What is Codidact" there could be a more link with a history of Codidact? (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279678 |
Just suggested an edit and saw that it slightly changes the meaning of the last paragraph. I would like to change the suggestion but cannot. Basically the idea was to write explicitly that score > 0.5 means more upvotes than downvotes and score 0.5 means equal number of upvotes and downvotes and so o... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285126 |
@#53078 Kind of agree but I would do both. Showing only positive content to visitors is okay, after all they are likely more interested in reading something useful.
However, if people register you want to show them all the content, so they will discover the negatively scoring content soon anyway. ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280021 |
Somewhat related [multiple sign out buttons](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/280247) (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285134 |
[Wikipedia notability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability) is concerned with significance, external coverage and neutral view points. However QPixel could probably right away listed in some software lists on Wikipedia, I think. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285128 |
Okay, probably we should separate filters and sort orders, if only to be able to combine them independently. Maybe there is already a feature request about it somewhere and the programmers simply didn't come around to it yet... Will search for it. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285128 |
Small nitpicking. I think the calculated score is always positive (between 0 and 1). You probably want to have a certain threshold there instead (let's say score > 0.4 for example). Positive might then not be the right word either, maybe more like "Useful", which would be the right word. Also it woul... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285122 |
@#8046 Or it could become even a full-flegded feature over time. Not only mergers but also splits are imaginable. It sounds not trivial though. What about user privileges, or links in the edit history or for search engines a rewrite of old URLs (people might have linked from outside to questions or a... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285122 |
How much content overlap is there? (Quite a lot, power user could actually have OS specific categories)
Do the respective communities agree with that? (One would need to ask on their Metas)
Does the software support that operation? (Merging of two sites, adding tags, selecting a new design set, how... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280213 |
"Wouldn't it be helpful..." Not sure. What additional useful information would one gain? Does it matter through which means an edit was made? Sure, a pair revision would add some credibility, but in the end it's just an edit. Or is the idea to emphasize the role of the reviewers more? (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281438 |
No problem. If I have time I can look at some of the proposal and search if they have been suggested otherwise and then create Q&A about them and link back to this Q&A. It doesn't really matter who is doing it and some of the proposals might be quite good. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281438 |
This question combines multiple feature requests in one. They should be split into separate feature request Q&A, so that they can be discussed on voted on independently. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285103 |
@#8058 I see. Your comment would basically be an answer to this question that could be edited later when it's possible to donate again. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281898 |
The history of license changes was basically that the license of new content changed with changes in the TOS (from 2.5 to 3 in 2010 I think, and from 3.0 to 4.0 in 2018, May). Independently of this, they announced license changes in 2019 and for a too large scope. That was received badly and also fac... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281873 |
It's certainly useful, but then a declined flag isn't a big thing either and this feature would be hopefully needed in only a small number of cases. It can probably be low priority. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284509 |
I think it's good that you reported the problem (with Chrome or the code or both) because whoever it is to blame it either needs a fix, a workaround (could even be an additional hint) or a rejection. The important question is what we could do about it. Maybe the programmers have an idea there. I jus... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283444 |
Agree with the social network features like like/dislike but what about agreement or importance? There is additional information that can be conveyed, like say a comment points out an important shortcoming of a post and if many people agree with the comment, basically signalling to others that this c... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284458 |
It might make a difference in that readers might put more or less trust in a reaction if they know it's the same user or the other way around, a user might react more objectively if the reaction can be traced back. But I don't think this is likely to happen. I would assume that the post creator would... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283580 |
FAQ within a Q&A system does not carry much meaning beyond (we expect many duplicates). Maybe choose a different name, something like "canonical" maybe, to indicate that this Q&A is very important and likely to represent consensus views that are likely to remain that way for a longer time. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284331 |
@#36396 Providing additional service takes more time and there is usually no way around that. This post doesn't really say why and when alt texts would not be helpful. To me it looks like laziness at the costs of accessibility. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284458 |
It's not only because it may bestow benefits, but also because one is not impartial with regard to self-created content. An independent "works for me" from a different person who does not have "any stakes in the content" is more reliable. That's why it's better not to be able to react to own content ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284509 |
Should Chrome display that border but doesn't? If yes, it's a bug in Chrome, but still a problem for QPixel. In that case, maybe a different additional thing can be done for Chrome users. Chrome is widely used and probably should be supported, even with bugs in it. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284843 |
The listed topics do not look very piquant to me. What would make them so in the context of this post? (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284764 |
Replace T in the center with a space. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284846 |
"...growth for growth's sake isn't our main goal...." Sure, but growth in activity has a lot of advantages with many things scaling more favorably with a bigger community, For example getting good answers to questions more quickly or getting more interesting questions to answer. That's why I would sa... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
- ← Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next →