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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit | Post #285236 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285236 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285236 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Should we remove closed questions from the question list? No, we should not completely remove them from the question list, making them effectively private or moving them to a dedicated category. While the purpose of these actions seems to be to give these questions some respite as well as increase the quality of the question list at the same time, these... (more) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285189 |
I can also confirm that it works. (more) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285202 |
...manual removal of the content that matches these criteria by moderators maybe? (more) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285197 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285197 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Question | — |
Regular deletion (roomba) of content unlikely to ever be useful I noticed that questions exist on this network and are accessible that are unlikely to ever be very helpful, for example because they were marked as completely off-topic. Examples - Are international phone numbers available? in Power User - For cleaning food and objects, power scrubber vs. Elect... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285180 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: If a user is not able to directly edit the post, allow the edit to be suggested This feature request was marked as declined, but in a comment, a preferred alternative was given, which was: > If you want to add mod-only (red) tags, better flag the post. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #278004 |
Suggested edit: seems to have been fixed quite some time ago (also see comments) (more) |
helpful | almost 3 years ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #278020 |
Suggested edit: It's not broken anymorr, /questions doesn't exist anymore. (more) |
declined | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281235 |
Post edited: added year to title (this game that is not happening might again not happening in other years) and a few improvments. |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285134 |
@#8046 Thanks for the suggestion. Will look at the GH issues. (more) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #279488 |
Suggested edit: added qpixel tag (more) |
helpful | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #279678 |
Suggested edit: Add clarification what post score > 0.5 means (it means more upvotes than downvotes). (more) |
helpful | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285134 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280021 |
Somewhat related [multiple sign out buttons](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/280247) (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285141 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Donation account cannot currently make live charges, transaction has not been processed According to this comment there is an issue with invalid birth dates stored with the Stripe service that cannot be resolved easily. It's known and there is ongoing communication to try to fix that but currently donation through this channel is not possible. Sponsoring Codidact on Github might be a vi... (more) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285134 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285134 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285134 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How to grow all of our communities? Here maybe some things that others may have forgotten or may not have emphasized as such: Continue supporting the software development I'm really surprised how well developed and rich of features QPixel is, even more after hearing that it is an effort of only two main developers and a few other... (more) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 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) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #281235 |
Suggested edit: added year to title (this game that is not happening might again not happening in other years) and a few improvments. (more) |
helpful | almost 3 years ago |