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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Question | — |
How should we approach a programming site or sites? We have a suggestion for a site for professional coding, and software engineering and computer science also have some interest, and there are overlapping suggestions for cloud technologies and single-board microcontrollers. It seems likely that participants here have interests in other related are... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275959 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275959 |
That's weird; I edited a recipe last night. Investigating. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275943 |
Thanks @Olin; I was in fact eyeing your formatting help. :-) Changes should all be there now; go ahead and try typing something into the "category" textbox and setting sequence numbers. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275940 |
I think they'll all need to change to "/posts". A category can support more than one post type, and anyway these things could change over time as a site's use of a category evolves, so we shouldn't baking that into the external interface. Missed this in testing/code review, sorry. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275943 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Help --> Site Information? That topic was meant to be disabled, but we hit a bug. It's gone now. That topic is meant to be an example starting point for people setting up a new site. We'll be making some improvements to the template. On this site, where you've already built out other help, it's redundant. You can now ... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275927 | Post edited | — | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275857 |
Oh, I didn't mean invite the inquisitive hordes now; you need to get set up first. I just meant that *alongside* developing that site introduction, also try to build some good *content* for them to see. Nobody wants to see an empty site on a first visit. That paragraph was addressed to the founder... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275857 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: New site setup process? We need to create some better "new community" documentation, but moderators will be able to do most of what you need, so first we have to identify the initial moderators. (Eventually each community will choose its own, but to get started we'll need to appoint two or three pro-tem moderators.) The d... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74947 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275776 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275826 |
[Launched](https://cooking.codidact.com/), so we can now continue these important discussions on meta there. Looking forward to building the site! (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74947 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275842 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: UX changes: dark theme, distinct borders and shortcuts I'm photosensitive and bright white backgrounds bother me too. Dark-mode themes tend to fail me in other ways, so I usually try to soften the bombardment of bright white pixels instead. In case it helps, I'll share my workaround. This is the CSS override I use, with the Stylus add-on, for Codidact... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275836 |
On import, while there's no UI for it (and that's not planned soon), we can import questions selectively. The community could assemble a list of links to specific questions and we could pull those over, so you can cherry-pick those few valuable posts that would be a hassle to recreate here. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275825 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How should Codidact "advertise" and gain community members? We have to build awareness through word of mouth. And that's not about Codidact in general, and isn't always even about specific Codidact communities (though it can be). Sometimes tweeting a link to a specific, interesting question will get people to take a look who wouldn't have come to the such-a... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74947 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275776 |
One more question: any suggestions for a logo? What graphical element(s) should we include? Or if somebody wants to propose an image, feel free -- aiming for an aspect ratio of about 3:1 width:height. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275776 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275776 |
Now that we've confirmed that Circuitlab integration isn't a blocker and it looks like the overlap with the general-engineering proposal has been addressed, I think we can proceed. What URL slug (the part before codidact.com) do y'all want? "electrical-engineering" is clear but also long; do you hav... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275785 |
Changing a name is relatively easy. Once a site has been in use for a while, changing a URL has more dependencies (we'd have to either break links or have a redirect -- not hard, but something to think about). If the URL slug is "rpg" that's pretty flexible; if it's "tabletop-rpg" or "trpg" and you... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275808 |
If we didn't have Circuitlab integration, what would people do? Use whatever tools they like and just upload images? Use some web-based tool and link to a project there so it could be edited? I'm guessing that site-specific tool integrations are a ways off, especially if there are licensing issues... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74823 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74991 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275776 |
@KingDuken how did that work? Can you link to a question that uses it so we can see? Thanks. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275776 |
Sounds promising! Do you need Mathjax? Any other non-standard features? (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275785 |
My suggestion on categories is: use categories when the *base expectations* are different. For example, "Researched Q&A" on Speculative Science, "Gear Recommendations" on Photography, and the various contest categories have *different rules*. Blogs/wikis are also different, hence separate. (And, o... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275797 |
Question on the site's meta; let's work it out there: https://speculative-science.codidact.com/questions/275801 (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75058 |
Thomas, could you review the questions with both tags and make a proposal? We can import more data. If it turns out that most or all questions with both tags are fine then we can pull those in; if it's more selective, then if you can compile a list of URLs we can pull in those specific questions. ... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275784 |
I've run into this too when trying to do footnotes. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #275776 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #275785 |
I mostly agree, though I wonder if categories or tags serve the first three areas better. (And I wouldn't call that "fluff"; some players are there primarily for the roleplaying and storytelling, with mechanics being merely a means to serve that end.) I'm not concerned about overlap with worldbuild... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74823 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75053 |
Sounds good Thomas! We can import more questions later, but wholesale import of that tag would have brought a lot of extra stuff, so let's discuss first. We might end up with a list of specific URLs or a better characterization. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75053 |
I think "what could happen, based purely on science/logic", fits Speculative Science. We're in the process of importing data there now, after which we'll write some custom scope help and meta posts and stuff (reflecting the discussions here). I think it will meet your needs -- and if not, please us... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #74907 |
@HDE226868 a category name is easily changed once created, so please do think about it and see if you have better ideas. Thanks! (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75058 |
If the imaginary force can be fully-enough specified that one can apply scientific reasoning, I would think that would be fine. A lot of questions on WB about imaginary forces lack that foundation and answers end up being "well it's magic; do whatever you want", which I think you'd agree isn't very ... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75033 |
I want to see Codidact serve this community; I'm asking questions so we can all, together, figure out how to do that. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75033 |
Thanks for explaining, @staticvoid. What you say about overlaps makes sense. Does the space logically divide into "themes", the way web dev does with front-end and back-end work? Do you see this as purely about code or also tools (IDEs, source control, etc)? If tools, what about process and design (s... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #75062 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Software Engineering && Mathematics && Computer Science This post covers three different proposed sites and has several upvotes, indicating some level of interest -- but it's hard to tell which parts. See also the recent proposal for Professional Coding, which overlaps two of the three proposed here. I'd love to see some well-developed proposals for tec... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75053 |
@Thomas it started out as "WB, but without the magic complications". I see you've found that proposal now and I'm very interested in your input in shaping it. I think it does much of what you're looking for, though maybe not the "plotting" questions ("what would happen" can run quite a gamut). (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75061 |
Yeah, there's a wireframe floating around that includes "follow", but it's not on the must-have list for 1.0 aka MVP. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #74823 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75058 |
I'll update the proposal with something more specific about intended scope; thank you for calling out this deficiency. We don't mean "science" in the sense of "only stuff that's real today", but more that we're aiming for things where you can draw a line from science to the desired result. Faster-t... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #75033 |
Related: https://meta.codidact.com/questions/74893 (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |