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 Monica Cellio
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #277177 |
Or auto-expand the box if the text gets too long for the original size. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277175 |
Reproduced (Chrome). (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277130 |
@Art repro. The featured link is different from the hot link. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277119 |
Reproduced (on Travel). Weird! Obviously *some* people can vote... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277101 |
@Olin the context of this discussion is privilege-enablement, which is currently done by rep and which it sounds like you agree *should not be*. Privileges should arise from trust earned by doing things on the site. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
@pnuts need a [tagline](https://languages.codidact.com/questions/277071) to use there; any suggestions, anyone? (Answer there please.) (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277072 |
Maybe embedding a poll in another post would work better, so the poll can be part of a larger Q&A about a topic (site proposal, site policy discussion, choosing topics for challenges, whatever). (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
@Zerotime the site has just been launched. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
@moonlight the site has just been launched. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
@becky82 the site has just been launched. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277052 |
No repro (but different OS & browser), *but* when I just tried the image did not appear in the preview until I clicked in the post box after uploading. I don't know if that's related. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277029 |
When we implement trust levels that will be explicitly allowed: even if you can't do anything else yet, you'll be able to vote and comment on stuff on your own questions. I'll see if adding that exception now, before trust levels, is straightforward. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277023 |
@pnuts that was more inertia and less intention. I don't think we explicitly talked about that. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277007 |
@MathPhysics ghost towns aren't a good look, for the network or for the individual site, so we'd like to have some indication that there will be activity. We're learning as we go, which is why we don't have hard-and-fast rules. I'm not very familiar with Math.SE, so I don't know how to answer your ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277007 |
@ziggurism oh wow; I had not seen [Henning's profile](https://math.stackexchange.com/users/14366/hmakholm-left-over-monica). It looks like he contributed a ton there and was looking for another place to share, so it seems worth contacting him and letting him know about Codidact. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276994 |
I have spent a lot of time playing RPGs (mostly D&D through 3.5, with some misc mixed in) but don't currently play and am not up on the latest developments. I would participate in questions that are more "craft" and less rules-interpretation. If there is a blog that welcomes "craft" posts and/or re... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276997 |
I would participate casually, asking the occasional question but almost certainly unable to contribute useful answers. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276998 |
I'm interested as a casual user. I expect to have occasional questions (particularly about crafts and daily life in historical periods). I have some knowledge in some *very* niche areas. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275968 |
I hesitate over "debate"; could you clarify what you had in mind there? (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276971 |
luap42's answer covers what I would have said. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276971 |
I'll write up a more general answer to this question later (it's something we need to document more clearly than we do), but on the specific example: we added a status-pending tag to the proposal recently to indicate it's moving forward. We haven't launched it yet because we figured syntax highligh... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276905 |
Templates should always be treated as starting points -- suggested text, but not a format enforced by the UI. That way if you need to adjust the presentation for a recipe, you can. For example, sometimes it makes sense to treat a thing and its sauce as two mini-recipes within a recipe.
(@Mithra... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276905 |
I did say "optional". I'm asking whether it should be available, meaning whether it's useful in some places. Where it's not useful, don't use it. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276748 |
@Marco13 I don't think it's being worked on right now (though I wasn't online an hour ago when you left that comment). I have sometimes seen the bubble not disappear until I either click the inbox again or refresh the page (or go to a new page). Other times it responds immediately. I haven't been ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276884 |
@pnuts if people only participate on one site and there seems to be a place *right there* to report issues or make requests, it will seem natural to some to do so. The downside, as you say, is that fewer people will see it or know it's already been reported -- but we shouldn't assume that all users ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276873 |
More direct interaction for the author is intentional, yes. Some things *only* the author can fix, so send that signal early so the author can address it and get an answer. Even when a site is large, any particular question probably has only a few people interacting on it, so my hope is that they'l... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276873 |
@Marco13 agreed; we might need to change things with scale, and push vs pull is an important factor. I think suggested edits are important enough to be called out as I suggested, because good edits actively improve quality *and* people who get prompt responses to their contributions are more likely t... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276871 |
We'll need to consider edits, too. Consider a post that was originally fine and then was edited to add NSFW content. Also consider a post that was suspect, reviewed and approved (not NSFW) by moderators, and then edited. (I don't know if those two cases are the same.) (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276833 |
We've said before, and I'll say again, that we're going to show some other stats with users, something to indicate the volume of activity and overall scoring. No there will not be rep because rep as it exists (both here and on SE) is a flawed model. It'll be something more like "17 answers (15 well... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276844 |
You downvote *questions* because you disagree with a *site's* import policies? By the way, are you aware that imported questions are now labeled on the question list? (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276819 |
I don't see a problem with the author of a deleted question being able to see all answers that were not explicitly deleted. That is, if something got deleted while the question was still live, the author wouldn't have been able to see that, so shouldn't gain that access through question deletion. B... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276808 |
Definitely a bug, and being looked into. This is affecting all sites. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276781 |
While the problems you list certainly exist, they also exist on other sites with varied backgrounds and topics that can be *very* detail-oriented and precise. There's only so much that tooling and configuration can do, so this is an area where community curators need to help guide people, edit, reta... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276785 |
Oops, yeah -- authors should be able to see that. I'll add it to our board. If you want a copy of the text so you can work on it offline, just let me know how to get it to you (or we can undelete and you can add a "work in progress" notice to the top if you prefer). Sorry about the inconvenience! (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276704 |
Another consideration: questions that compare more than one language. I think we want a single Q&A category, with strong tagging. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276704 |
My primary concern here is that if we end up with 10+ categories, that poses both UI and UX challenges we did not plan for when designing categories. I like this idea in principle but I'm not sure how to approach it. Do language *families* make sense as an organizing principle, or is that no better... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
@becky82 the basic Unicode support is there. On the Judaism site we ended up changing to a different font for legibility -- not a big deal; just had to find one. I don't know Arabic so I don't know if the default font is satisfactory. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276752 |
Thanks for the new example @manassehkatz. That's better. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
Hi @becky82 and thanks for commenting! Wow, I wonder what the problem is with the Arabic proposal. They're welcome to come here and join this proposal. (We'll need to add Arabic font support, but we added Hebrew for the Judaism site so we're not starting from square 1.) (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276754 |
We've sketched this out (i.e. our wireframes show it and no one's objected :-) ), but we haven't implemented it yet. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276752 |
@ArtOfCode oh, neat! I never noticed that. :-) We should probably enhance that tooltip a bit to at least say "score:" or something and not just the number. :-) (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276701 |
Are you involved in that A51 proposal or in contact with the people who are working on it? If you can ask them (without being spammy) if they'd be interested in a site here, that'd help us understand if we have enough people interested enough to build it. I see 8 upvotes here (one of them is mine),... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276593 |
If we build a general software-development site, I think having a careers category there would enhance it. It'd be software-specific, not like Workplace.SE, but Workplace.SE was pretty software-heavy and certainly assumed office jobs (as compared to, say, plumbers or teachers, which were supposed to... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276700 |
@Marco13 I think it would start with a meta discussion -- first consensus that it's time to spin off, then consensus on what tags to consider, and then (in my proposal) setting up a category where people can review that to see whether that set of questions is what people meant in the earlier discussi... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276693 |
Yes I asked for that too. We're going to add "include in ads?" as a configuration option for categories, so we can turn it off for meta and leave it up to communities whether to include other categories like contests. (And if a community doesn't want to have random-post ads at all, they can just tu... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276692 |
Just in case the question arises... the examples in the screenshot are from a test server. :-) (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276658 |
I upvoted for "we should make it clear", not to support the example of summary removal by staff. I agree that the process should apply no matter who appointed the mod. Mods should be able to do their jobs without feeling hindered by concerns about unjust removal. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276645 |
If we're concerned about noisy/nefarious appeals flooding the list and making it hard to find the real ones, they don't all have to be mingled on the same list -- deliberated appeals on one list, summary judgements on another. And it would be fine to aggregate them where applicable, e.g. "July 2020,... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276644 |
@luap42 I agree that we should give the panel *tools and guidance* but allow them to use their judgement here, as they can in the rest of their deliberations. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #276209 |
Related: https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276618. This question has a lot of support; if no one else does it first I'll try to propose a reworking of trust levels along these lines, as an answer to this question. I think we can make trust "levels" more independent, and in fact we had already ide... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |