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 #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 |
| Comment | Post #290052 |
@#65961 Sure. I'm just not very fond of posting single-line answers myself. There's a voice in my head (not literally) telling me I need to write more than that. :P
@#64656 One of the links in my now posted answer. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290055 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How do I suggest edits to tags? This isn't possible, as of yet. It's a limitation in the system, and one that needs fixing. It's been mentioned a few times, and so is a known limitation. It's not by design; it's just functionality not yet implemented. See also: - https://meta.codidact.com/posts/289350 - https://meta.codida... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290052 |
This isn't possible, as of yet. It's a limitation in the system, and one that needs fixing. I've flagged your post as duplicate. It can be reopened once it's possible to suggest such edits. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289911 |
@#8046 I don’t really see how that solves the issue. Also, if this risks discouraging further edits, improvements and updates, the canonical may simply age out. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289911 |
> It's hard to engage with the Stack Overflow community to improve the canonical, because people (especially the original authors) reject or roll back edits
How is this not going to become a problem of equal weight, at Codidact?
The other issues you mention have solutions that are easier to ima... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289745 |
Post edited: Typo |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #289745 |
Suggested edit: Typo (more) |
helpful | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289910 |
If it’s unrelated to this, and really had nothing to do with this one, then I agree; a discussion about it is off-topic here. However, if it did, it would be relevant, as we’d both agree with the question text here, although interpret it differently.
That said, I’m one of the downvoters there, so... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289911 |
I understood that, but maybe I’m just reading too far into it, in considering it not just for the current situation, but future situation. I took a piece of text which was written in the context of _now_, and applied it to the _future_. Perhaps that was wrong. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289910 |
Specifically, in the case on SO, is that regex Q/As are more about asking somebody to fish for you, instead of teaching you how to fish by yourself. And with the vast amount of «what’s the regex for this», and the regex debugging questions, we are left with a database that cannot really be searched. ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289911 |
Perhaps I’m misreading the true meaning behind «caring about content».
If we require that people are self-invested in their content down the road, we’re gonna run into problems once the original authors leave the site. This will happen; not everybody stays around indefinitely, for many reasons. O... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289910 |
This is a good and necessary discussion I have considered bringing up myself, and I definitely encourage filling this database of knowledge independently of what’s on SE. Obviously, there’s a fine line between «basic, but acceptable», and «too basic, and too easily accessible in the documentation», b... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
> should I be forced to read some Rand who has never touched a computer opinion on it ?
If a comment is not relevant, or has no reason to be posted, it should just be deleted. Flag it for a moderator to remove it. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
@#65505 I still fail to understand why you resist using the comment section, and why you insist that the discussion chat _must be private_. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
> let's say I'm talking about microchips and I want Olin's opinion, should I be forced to read some Rand who has never touched a computer opinion on it ?
Why would Olin want to engage in a private chat with you about this? He'd wanna do it openly, so everybody can benefit from what he has to say, ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
> How will people figure out if X method is better than Y without argument ?
Hopefully, an answer post should contain everything necessary; if not, the comments should ask for clarifications, or give criticism of the content.
> Private chats would just facilitate that
Private chats lead to... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
> Also, what's wrong with people arguing ?
Q/A is not the right format for a discussion, and questions in the Q/A format are not discussion starters. Also, when I speak of the unpleasant experiences, that is people literally fighting in the comment section. Just a few days ago, I chose to engage i... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
> Not that I have anything against your opinion, but your justification made no sense because Codidact's goal is to serve the community, not profit
No, I'm saying it doesn't align with the goals of Codidact, which is, an open repository of knowledge, which also happened to, once upon a time, be th... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289767 |
You should also [update this](https://meta.codidact.com/abilities/unrestricted) to say why it was awarded. It's where I imagine most users would go first, and there's no trace of "new site" there.
Also, it's unclear if the "participate everywhere" ability is lost for users that don't fulfill the s... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289767 |
But you introduced a new typo!
> This ability allows you to post**s** 3 top-level posts
;) (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289761 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Add an entry for the "Participate" ability to the help center Currently, the help center has a list of user abilities, with sub-pages for each of the entries, to elaborate on them. The help center should also have an entry for "Participate", the first ability rewarded upon sign-up, to better explain exactly what plain new users have access to. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289738 |
Post edited: Rewritten for better clarity |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #289738 |
Suggested edit: Rewritten for better clarity (more) |
helpful | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289733 |
@#65505 No, this is unreasonable. What Olin is describing has been a constant issue in the comment sections on Stack Overflow (and probably other SE sites), and sometimes, people do drag these arguments/fights into the SE chat. These are mostly unpleasant experiences. Even if that isn't what the auth... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289723 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #286683 |
As long as the message type information is preserved for easy redesigns in the future. I do think that design risks being confusing, though. It'll look like a message header with a missing message. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289726 |
The existence of a comment thread still means it's somewhat of a noise. In addition, there is a small chance that something useful beyond the topic of a specific comment thread, is posted there. So I think [Moshi](https://meta.codidact.com/users/53196)'s [answer](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/28972... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #286683 |
The «resolved by user» comment should be visually distinct from normal comments, to clearly mark the difference between an actual comment, and a system message. Something similar to how Github/GitLab handle replies and system messages in PRs and issues, should work. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289723 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Notifying each other that a commented-on issue is resolved, to produce fewer comments rather than more The exchange that provoked this question, happened on one of my answers. I wrote the response to you, to acknowledge your helpful comment, and to notify you that you were indeed right. In addition to pointing out the typo in my post, you also said you were unsure about what I really meant. As suc... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289719 |
Post edited: Typo |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289719 |
My answer may contain two misconceptions; that answers already prevent question deletion on Codidact, and that the deletion votes privilege on Stack Overflow would provide an opportunity to move an answered self-asked question into the deletion review queue. I'll update my answer if it comes to my kn... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289719 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289719 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Shouldn't be able to delete question after any response There are some good reasons to prevent question deletion when answers exist. There are users that believe the correct course of action is to "clean up" their instance of communication on the site, by deleting their question, once they have received an answer. This is wrong, and the system should have... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289626 |
> - Should existing links to old proposals continue to work?
> - Should the authors/followers of old proposals be notified and be given time to migrate before losing access?
> - Should there be any automatic migration?
Why should these _not_ be preserved/handled? (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |