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 Karl Knechtel
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #292200 |
Since this is default text that isn't being provided by the actual post content, it seems natural to me that the browser would want to localize it. I would call that a feature. (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #292194 |
I can reproduce this from the users list and individual user posts, but not from the user card here. Firefox 128.0.3 from Linux.
Edit: I couldn't reproduce it from the user card on *this* post, but I *could* from user cards on that other Meta post. But also *not* from the images embedded in that q... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Comment | Post #291785 |
I agree that the interface could be improved but I would still *greatly* prefer for the threads to be collapsed in some form or other by default. (For example, the *entire thread* could go in a `<details>` tag.) A big part of the site design is that comments don't take up a bunch of screen space, and... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #291785 |
This answer (at least in the first revision) coincidentally is 995 characters long, so it (less the footer) gives an indication of how much screen space a "full-length" comment might be expected to take up. To me it hardly seems worth collapsing. (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291785 | Initial revision | — | 11 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Should details tags work in comments? Even if it didn't actively encourage misuse of the site, time spent on a feature like this would be far better used elsewhere. `` tags are already sufficient to implement a "spoiler" within an answer. If for some reason it were necessary to mark comment content as a spoiler - for example, discussi... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291781 | Initial revision | — | 11 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How to deal with links to commerce? Please don't use/allow links like this It's fundamentally still advertising Notwithstanding what manufacturers or retailers are suggested, and regardless of apparent intent, links like these still fundamentally serve the purpose of advertising a product or service. If this answer had come from ... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Comment | Post #291620 |
I also agree. I think the usual visual language is to: a) reduce background contrast; b) on hover, change the cursor to the "universal no" symbol. (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291760 | Initial revision | — | 11 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Clarity for a user who has become signed out during editing I like this idea generally, but I don't think that an unusable button should turn directly into a redirect to the login page. Instead, it should pop up a message explaining the situation, and offering to go to the login. Otherwise, I think it would be far too jarring. Personally, being presented with... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291758 | Initial revision | — | 11 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Giving a fish vs. teaching how to fish Varying utility I think you and I have tossed around ideas like this quite a bit already - if not between the two of us, then separately to the crowd. And I think my viewpoint hasn't changed. Personally, my sense is that this idea only makes sense for the most technical sites, where there's pre... (more) |
— | 11 months ago |
| Edit | Post #291345 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Syntax highlighting comments break the unsupported tags warning message Based on the comment discussion, I can see no reason to consider support for syntax highlight hinting via HTML comments. "Code fences" have a built-in syntax highlighting suggestion and are all around quite practical and standard: such "fenced code blocks" are part of the CommonMark standard, and ove... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #291331 |
Are syntax highlighting *comment hints* actually a thing? I mean - is there prior art for them, like some other site that recognizes and uses them? I'm not aware of anything like that having an effect on Stack Exchange, for example. What actually is the underlying motivation for supporting them here,... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291321 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Why prefer Codidact to Stack Exchange? Superior technology The site software supports more post types than just Q&A, and multiple Q&A sections with separate labels. This allows each community to organize content, post high-quality information without the need to hew to the Q&A format, set up "staging" areas for questions that might ne... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #291242 |
This is marked `status-completed` now, but the bug is still [completely reproducible](https://software.codidact.com/categories/38/tags?q=hax). It indeed seems to happen when there are no matching tags. The searches from the OP do work now; I guess it's now searching the entire tag description instead... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #291184 |
This proposal is specifically about Markdown links. I didn't consider that URLs normally auto-link; deliberate link-breaking is certainly out of scope for what I imagined. The goal is to prevent generating actual links that either people might click on or that could affect SEO for the destination pag... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281546 |
Post edited: additional grammar fix |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291184 |
Post edited: ... Nope, seems I was wrong? This stuff is hard to see clearly in light mode |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291184 |
Post edited: It appears that such spans only have extra height in the preview.... |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291184 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Proposal and design for temporary blocking of new user links (anti-spam) Discussion on Introduce a spam reaction? brought up the idea of preventing new users from posting links, so as to create an additional hurdle for spammers (who will rarely make any serious attempt to integrate themselves into a community before spamming). This of course has the drawback that quest... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Suggested Edit | Post #281546 |
Suggested edit: additional grammar fix (more) |
helpful | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291183 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Introduce a spam reaction? I like this idea. I'm not worried about the potential for "drama" because disruptive users already have many other tools at their disposal (such as, say, posting), and in practice this kind of disruption is quite rare outside of spam - even on massive sites like Stack Overflow. (Even there, nonsense ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #291156 |
In that case I'm afraid I can't really imagine what you have in mind. "Voting" on closure on SE really just means getting a specific number of people to weigh in. That's part of the point: it's not a process where everyone voices an opinion either for or against up front.
I don't think that "getti... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291158 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: What's more important for codidact - quality or helping questions get answered? At last we are getting to addressing the elephant in the room head-on. Lundin and Olin's answers both capture ideas that I feel are very important, that apply to varying extents across Codidact. I'll include a couple collapsed sections of background, and then present a proposal. There are fund... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #291156 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Can we streamline the process for closed bad questions? > Reopening takes a while, usually a few days.... If our goal is to make it as easy as possible for experts to share knowledge, this goes against that goal. ...a lot of these questions are not that important - especially the ones that end up closed. They're small, simple things... I'm not going to cr... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290956 |
At any rate, it's probably appropriate to close this as no-repro.... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290956 |
I see it in the same menu, after the `cloudflareinsights.com` entry. You should too after trusting `codidact.com`. However, I am no longer reproducing the rest of the bug: while `codidact.com` JavaScript is still required to make the widget work (as I would expect), `codidact.org` JavaScript is not. (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290951 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
PSA: question tagging UI apparently now depends on JavaScript from codidact.org I use Noscript, so Javascript is blocked by default for new domains for me. As it happens, prior to today I had `codidact.com` (and `jsdelivr.org`) whitelisted, but not `codidact.org`. When I was writing my previous Meta post just now, I found that the tag search/auto-completion (at the bottom of ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290950 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Is "voting different on Meta" for Codidact? Stack Overflow's help section offers the following guidance for its meta site: > ### Voting is different on meta. > > Like normal Stack Exchange sites, Meta allows members to vote on questions and answers. For most posts, votes reflect the perceived usefulness: well-written, well-reasoned, well-... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290080 |
> On the other hand, could there be an open-source spam- and troll- (and low-quality post)-filter, which still works in spite of being open source?
Even if the code for such a system is open source, its heuristics have to come from somewhere - and they're dramatically less useful if there isn't a ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290680 |
If by "draft mechanism" you mean the feature by which posts are auto-saved and there's also a manual "save draft" button, I strongly doubt that people are seeing that as a way to store "not yet ready" questions longish-term while polishing them - it comes across as a recovery mechanism in case one's ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290676 |
I think it stands to reason, If you can close your own question unilaterally without Vote on Holds, you should be able to reopen it unilaterally as well - unless the community is *also* trying to keep the question closed. I think of it as two separate statuses: "closed by OP" and "closed by the commu... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290646 |
Agreed; letting the unskilled ask their questions is one of the best ways to discover what information is most useful to the masses - as well as *why* they are confused about whatever commonly confuses them.
However, once that discovery is done, it's time to establish the best possible version of ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290662 |
Post edited: Expand information and use some nicer formatting |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #290649 |
I think you and Andreas both have good points here - it can be difficult to title threads usefully, but it's something we should all strive for. But I get the sense that trichoplax intends to have a reference Q&A for any *future* discussions asking people to use better thread titles. For example, if ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290662 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Why do we have "General comments" threads? History Originally, comments worked much as one may have seen Somewhere Else; but in mid-2021 the threaded comments feature was introduced. Each comment thread needs a title; by default, the software uses the first part of the first comment. It wouldn't make sense for existing comments to be al... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289668 |
See also [my own Meta Q&A](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/289687) for some thoughts about reasons for *closing* questions - which are fairly closely related.
(more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #290646 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Can you post a question just to answer it yourself? Such questions are accepted and encouraged, by design It's not our idea, or a new idea, either. It's fundamental to the design and concept of Q&A sites, Codidact included. People who actually need an answer to a question are often in a uniquely bad position to actually ask that question. Out of... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |