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 Andreas demands justice for humanity
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #290648 |
Examples where I think "General comments" is reasonable (sometimes I just don't think every comment deserves its own thread. I don't want a million threads with 1 comment in each):
- https://meta.codidact.com/posts/290638/290646#answer-290646
- https://software.codidact.com/posts/290280 (Oh, see, I... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290648 |
I also see you've chosen to completely ignore my second paragraph, where I actually attempt to argue that having such comment threads, is sometimes the best of two options. That is not sloppy. (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290647 |
@#36396 If you're wondering, I kind of named this thread "General comments" on purpose, for the irony. (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290648 |
See, here's an example of comment threads being in my way; you decided to split up the same thing into two different comment threads, so now we're stuck with the consequences of that.
> You can always find a few words that give some hint what the larger comment is about.
Clearly I can't, and yo... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290647 |
@#36377 Huh, seems I went ahead and answered why such threads are still created, and not why they exist in the first place. You should post that as an answer. (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290647 |
Might be relevant to discover an answer to why we should _not_ use "General comments: https://meta.codidact.com/posts/282342
PS: sorry about the thread name... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290648 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Why do we have "General comments" threads? I'm one of the offenders, and the answer is quite simple: I often don't know what else to name it, even after several minutes of hard thinking. I want commmenting to be a task of ease, not a task of complication. In addition, there are many sorts of comments that don't actually fit very well in th... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290646 |
> People who actually need an answer to a question are often in a uniquely bad position to actually ask that question.
But they are in a great position to identify the problems, and provide us information about _which_ questions we need here. One will never be able to provide good Q/A without actu... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290640 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Can you post a question just to answer it yourself? Of course! You will find the answer if you ask what the purpose of Codidact is. Codidact is not a helpdesk, but a knowledge repository. So yes, part of the purpose of Codidact, is to answer your own questions. Codidact is like Wikipedia, but organized in the form of answers to questions, rather th... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290455 |
Post edited: Per Monica’s comment, this is not a bug, as it wasn’t built into the system in the first place. |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #290455 |
Suggested edit: Per Monica’s comment, this is not a bug, as it wasn’t built into the system in the first place. (more) |
helpful | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290455 |
What to do in case the answer has several comment threads, and merging them all into one doesn't make sense (or makes them too confusing)? Merge them by comment date, or thread creation date? Or just delete some of the threads completely (no value in keeping their comments)? Or is it just a very good... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290441 |
that'll probably be a pain to manage. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290441 |
@#8046 Ah. I'd rather not sacrifice the final presentation for solving issues behind the scene. I understand how for now, we need to keep things that way, but it gives us an important point to discuss in https://meta.codidact.com/posts/290439.
> if the community-specific reasons are part of the pa... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290442 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290442 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: What help pages need to be written? I wondered what the scope of the Linux Systems site was. So I went to the help center. There's no obvious page in there that explains what this site is. For instance, is this site accepting questions about programming on Linux? Instead, the limited information that exists, is hidden under "FAQ", wh... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290441 |
> Those might need to be somewhere else, behind a link, so that the help topic itself could be static and easily shared across the network.
But why? The help center already has topics unique to each community. I'm not following along here.
> Those might need to be somewhere else, behind a link,... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290441 |
This post was originally posted elsewhere, and as post moving isn't implemented as of yet, I've deleted it, and reposted this one.
Quoting @#8046 in a comment under the post:
> A help topic about closing should explain the general reasoning and how it works, as you said, and it'd be great to hav... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290441 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: What help pages need to be written? Add a list of standard close reasons to the help center. It must include the full list of shared close reasons (those that exist across all CD sites), as well as any additional standard close reasons for the specific community. The list must talk about the scope of questions, and why these close r... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290297 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290297 |
:) Well, it's been 3 years, so that should hopefully have been enough time to turn around. As long as it won't have any impact on today's situation, I suggest to leave it behind, and not let it follow you anymore. Everyone deserves a new chance. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290297 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Am I allowed to participate here, despite being network banned from Stack Exchange? Bad behaviour is not welcome here. That does not mean that somebody who made a mistake in the past, cannot be welcomed here. As long as you will contribute to Codidact in a constructive way, and follow our code of conduct, you are welcome to participate here. Stack Exchange and Codidact are independe... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #281610 |
> They also have a bounty system, though it wouldn't be easy to set up here due to Codidact being relatively less rep focused.
I hope Codidact never gets this. It excludes people with less reputation, those that are most in need of actually using it. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290192 |
The post has now been deleted, with the first flag marked as helpful. The second one is stuck as pending. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290192 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Submit same flag multiple times I just managed to flag the same post for spam twice. I flagged it, then commented on it, then flagged it again. There are now two separate spam flags on it in my flag history. Screenshot of the two flags in my history This is potentially possible to abuse to acquire abilities earlier than supp... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290154 |
> a lot of casual users know how to take pictures with their phones and share them via email/WhatsApp/text/etc. but have no clue how to upload directly to a web site, so I have some ideas on fixing that as well by allowing directed emails - e.g., send to postid-image@codidact.com and it automagically... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290154 |
@#8062 Well, I just assumed the purpose of having that low limit was to reduce server load, by requiring far less data transfer. As long as the server can handle such higher limits, and there's nothing to actually save by doing it client-side, then it's a possibility to do it server-side. Although, e... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290154 |
Post edited: Reduntant information for the post. Better suited for a comment. |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290154 |
See [this Q/A](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14672746/how-to-compress-an-image-via-javascript-in-the-browser) on SE for a solution. Excuse me for linking to the "wrong" Q/A site; we need more questions here. :P (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290154 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290154 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Allow including larger images Many images and screenshots captured today, are larger than 2 MB, the max allowed size on Codidact. This means users will regularly run into a barrier when attempting to upload images to their posts (or profile). Just now, I wanted to create a new post, which would benefit from some screenshots, howe... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290143 |
Bullet point 1 is quite an obvious and uncontroversial improvement, and doesn't require much resources, so I'd say that one should go through immediately.
Bullet point 2 is only a mild improvement over the current situation, so I don't really think it's enough of an improvement to mitigate the dr... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290143 |
It's kinda cumbersome _not_ to see the table from the dashboard, on the help page. When I go to the help page, I do so to learn more about abilities; I would certainly assume that my abilities progression is listed there. That's a part of learning about the abilities.
I also find it quite pointle... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290137 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290137 |
Right. Of course, not until _after_ posting this, I realized the abilities dashboard actually _does_ serve one more purpose: showing the abilities of another user.
For instance, Monica's abilities: https://meta.codidact.com/abilities?for=8046
And mine: https://meta.codidact.com/abilities?for=6427... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290137 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Merge abilities help page with abilities dashboard Where to find information about the abilities, is currently a bit confusing. There are too many pages. The help page for abilities, as well as the dashboard, present pretty much the exact same information, although the table on the dashboard is more informative than the list on the help page. I sug... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290056 |
@#65961 It doesn't really matter. Either way satisfies the needs here, and limiting it to Codidact's GitHub organization probably requires an extra check in the code, compared to doing it for everything on GitHub, so I don't see much purpose in doing that. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290056 |
Ideally, because Codidact uses GitHub for development, those links should also be rendered with their titles, with an additional prefix that shows they're to GitHub.
Not sure if I should limit my post to just Codidact ones, and leave the additional request for GH links in this comment, in an answer,... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290055 |
Post edited: Decided to have an explicit list instead of inlining the links in the text. Must've forgot to delete the inline one after I pasted it into the list. |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290056 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290056 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Display post titles instead of the URL for internal links Currently, when pasting a link to somewhere on Codidact, into posts or comments, the link is rendered in the output the same way it's written in the post source; that is, the URL. The parser should output the title of the page it's linking to. The same can be achieved manually, by visiting the pa... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |