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 celtschk
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #287867 |
You don't have to click on "Age" to have all posts shown. Clicking on "Age" just changes the ordering. (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #287456 |
Since it seems to have stayed unnoticed, I want to point out that there's also a [related bug report in Mathematics Meta.](https://math.codidact.com/posts/287481) (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #287390 |
It's also a community, isn't it? Apart from that this specific community being concerned with the software this very site runs on, is there really any difference between that community and any other? If someone is not interested, he can ignore that community, just as I e.g. ignore the tabletop commun... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #286443 |
On your footnote 1: Downvotes are IMHO the wrong tool for dealing with competition questions. Rather they should get closed until the competition is over. (more) |
— | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285568 |
@#54706 I think you misunderstood how I meant the term knowledge provider. If I understand you correctly, your interpretation of knowledge provider would be what I would call a knowledge creator (someone who generates new knowledge). Knowledge providers are people who make knowledge available to othe... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283928 |
Articles can be voted on and reacted to. Can't the same message also be conveyed through those mechanisms?
(more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285568 |
The most general term would be knowledge providers vs. knowledge seekers.
Knowledge seekers certainly will look for knowledge providers. However they only can recognise knowledge providers if those knowledge providers have already provided knowledge to other knowledge seekers, because generally th... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285415 |
@#8046 I think the best way would be to allow for each account to define several personas. A persona would look like a separate account for anyone but the account owner.
(more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285415 |
I would see the main reason for separate accounts the ability to manage what publicly looks like several accounts with a single account.
For example, imagine you are a Jew in an antisemitic country. Then you might want to participate both on the Judaism community and on a community on a topic rela... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285416 |
Actually my “landing page” is the [dashboard.][https://meta.codidact.com/dashboard] Unlike the main page, it shows me the information I care about: Where has been activity since my last visit? Of course it could be made more useful by also adding things like whether one of my posts have been voted on... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285245 |
Given that in Codidact you can't accept an answer, "no accepted answer" would be the same as "all questions". (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284973 |
More to the point, irrevocable does *not* imply that you are required to continue making the licensed work available. It just means that if someone got a copy under that license, he can continue to use it under the license as he pleases. For example, if you write a post under CC-BY-SA, and I copy it ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284854 |
That escalated to ad hominem quite quickly. Well, I leave it to the other readers here to decide who of us needs to be more humble.
Anyway, it's not me whom you have to convince (though if you had convinced me, I might have helped arguing for your side), so if you really believe that you are convi... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284854 |
@#36363 Do you have evidence for your claim? “I don't think that's true” is not a very convincing argument. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284720 |
One option would be to give it a score, like +1 for each favourite and -1 for each ignored tag. If the total score is positive, highlight, if it is negative, grey out, of it is zero, show as normal. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284523 |
But the titles aren't cut *that* short. Also, you can easily ready the comment you wrote to see if the beginning is somewhat informative (in 99% of the cases it is more informative than “General”), and if not, you can think about a more informative title (even if it is a bad one, it's very likely sti... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284523 |
I disagree. “General” is about the most uninformative title you can get. Indeed, whenever I see a comment thread names “General”, I'm unhappy about it (I have no idea whether you are the only one doing this). Someone taking extra effort to make the title *less* informative than the auto-generated one... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284509 |
If a browser effect of a supported browser means it doesn't work as expected, it *is* an issue of QPixel. Even a blatant browser bug that's not worked around would be. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284513 |
That suggestion indeed addresses my objections. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
That would be much better.
(more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284509 |
So you say that Chrome/Chromium is not supported on this site? Because otherwise it not working there *is* an issue of QPixel. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
Somewhere else I happened to compose answers to questions that others considered close-worthy. The result being that while I was working on my answer, the question was closed without me noticing anything, and only when I transmitted the answer, I noticed that all my work was for nothing. That sucks h... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284485 |
Maybe if the thread title was auto-generated from the first comment, it should be auto-generated again if that first comment is edited.
(more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
As I've stated before, I do **not** have an issue with re-doing the check on submission (and I certainly don't have an issue on doing it server-side). What I **do** have an issue is with the relevant **state** being the one at submission. That is, a downvote that arrived while the user was composing ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
“because we can't know that the client is well-behaved.” In other words, guilty until proven innocent. I **strongly** oppose that. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
If they have to wait for something out of their control to happen, then they are entirely blocked. The duration of that block may be short, or not if the site has currently little traffic (e.g. mathematics.CD currently had the last post 5 days ago).
And yes, now the last bullet point makes sense.... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284473 |
I disagree on several accounts. First, I disagree on the “when the user saves the post”. So you let the user work on the post without any warnings, and then when all the work is done, you tell them “too bad, your work was for nothing.” If the user can't post for whatever reason, that should be commun... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284469 |
If linked to the exact version, anything that allows to see whether two reactions were to the same version or different versions would work.
Another consideration would be to also allow to reaffirm a past reaction if an edit has been done, thus explicitly stating that the edit didn't address the i... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284364 |
I don't understand your problem. In which way are two comments with one question each better than one comment with two questions? Especially given that the two questions may well be related, and separating them into two comments might destroy important context for the second one. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283998 |
@#8046 Thanks, I didn't see that. I think it's because it is above the title; I wouldn't expect anything page specific there, just things like navigation. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283998 |
What about making the threshold at 10 comments? I think that should be sufficient for most comment threads to be completely inline.
However there are three things I'd like changed, no matter where the threshold is:
1. If the number of comments is just one over the threshold, they should still ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283318 |
I might occasionally participate in such a site. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283364 |
@#54232 The point is that the status *did not change* (and therefore there is nothing to update). And that is what I'm relying on. Indeed, IMHO a status change on refresh would worse than an immediate status change. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283364 |
Actually I rely on the notification *not* automatically getting marked read when opening in a new tab. Yes, technically I've read it. But I often don't have the time to react immediately, therefore I want it to stay “unread” until I've reacted. Yes, I could manually mark it as unread again, but that ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283222 |
Anyway, I don't have a problem with the claim “not worth the effort”. I only object to the claim “not possible”. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283222 |
@#8049 Do people really have so many email accounts that checking all of them is hard? On the other hand having several email addresses to the same account is not that uncommon. In particular, some providers allow you to stick some almost arbitrary stuff at the end of your user name to get an essenti... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283222 |
A secure way that works with still valid and read email addresses would be if at the user page a password-protected (with that user's password) link “I forgot my email” would send some standard email to the email address. That way nobody else can get at the email (you have to have read access to the ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282941 |
Adding random integers to SE links isn't a good idea either. While you don't see an effect as the user who follows the link, other, unrelated users may see the effect, as the extra number is supposed to be a user number indicating who posted the link (this is used in particular for some badges). That... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282871 |
Thank you. I just tested it, it works great! (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282628 |
One contentious topic on SE was whether to allow “Identify this Movie/TV show” questions should be allowed. I think with categories, Codidact has the perfect solution for this: By allowing those questions but giving them a specific category, people who don't like them can easily ignore them by just n... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281378 |
Just a random thought: Maybe a better way to indicate ability to write understandable and helpful posts (which is *not* the same as expertise!) would be the median (not average!) scoring of the posts. That way a one-hit wonder won't skyrocket your rating (unless it's your only post; but then, one mig... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282291 |
@Lundin: You still can write a C++98 answer to a C++17 question without answer tags. The only difference is that it is not quite as obvious without that tag. Anyway, if the question is only tagged with C++17 (which implies C++ anyway), then an answer cannot use the C++-98 tag (because that one obviou... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282291 |
With the restriction to child tags of the question tags, your offtopic scenario couldn't happen, as surely the Java tag isn't a child tag of the C++ tag. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282159 |
@MonicaCellio: Indeed, I just checked that Ctrl-U also opens the upload window. So checking that no shift was pressed would be sufficient. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282146 |
@MonicaCellio: A quick search turns up [this.](https://rubygems.org/gems/htmlentities) (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282146 |
Thank you for your answer. While I'm not happy with the workaround, I can live with it. However I disagree with one statement: You'd not have to pass it through an HTML parser; a search/replace adequately can handle entities just fine (and also allows to decide which entities to handle). I however to... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282110 |
@Canina: As you probably have noticed, I didn't get around yet of splitting. Given that there now has been some activity on the post, do you think splitting makes still sense? (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282110 |
@mattbrent: I just did a little experimentation. If I reduce the title font size from 20px to 17px and the font weight from 700 to 600, and at the same time increase the width for the post details to 88% (shortening the score part to 12%), then I get back to the 8 visible posts from the current desig... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282110 |
@Canina: Thanks for the feedback. I don't have the time to do it now, but I'll split the post this evening (at least 8 hours from now). (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281986 |
What about a separate category in electrical.codidact.com? That way it would still be somewhat separated (you won't see the battery questions on the main category, nor the main category questions on the battery category), but would still be on the EE site (where it topically fits), and prominently li... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |