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 luap42
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #277998 |
I’m going to write an answer later (unless someone else is faster than me), but taking the [tour](/tour) should give a summary of the most important differences. Some future changes (towards removing rep, improving comments, ...) are also planned and you might find some hints here on MetaCD, but they... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277974 |
@DonielF, well... it's better when it's hidden, right, @ArtOfCode ? :D (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277974 |
Is there a *rubocop* hidden????? (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277966 |
I'd suggest the following: When editing a post, all reaction types thereto can be seen. Users can mark the edit as resolving reaction X. Once the edit is submitted, the reactions will be hidden. Users who already reacted that way to a post will be shown a banner/message "Your reaction has been marked... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277961 |
I see your concerns. Hence I'd either require or strongly encourage users to add a comment with an explanation (especially) for their danger reaction. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277959 |
My gut feeling tells me that showing the names here is a good idea, but if there were agreement not to show it by default, I’d either consider making it an option or showing the name only when adding a comment (since it’s then shown already, OTOH makes intentional signed downvotes harder). (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277957 |
@DonielF Oh don’t worry, that happens from time to time... :P (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277957 |
@Olin Lathrop - yeah. I think, generally, that having the three reaction types replaces the need for signed up and down votes, as they cover *almost* the same meaning (accepted = up, outdated & dangerous = down). If a community wants to have separate signed up and downvotes, that'll be easily possibl... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277957 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Suggestion for allowing to mark answers as "accepted", "outdated" or "dangerous" Currently, it is possible to upvote and downvote answers. That's likely enough in most situations, but there are some cases where you might want to have more than one way to react to a post. For example, imagine you are on Software Development and an answer suggests a solution that drastically imp... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277924 |
Furthermore, in many cases, the changes are currently being deployed, when we add the tag. Some exceptions exist, especially if it is a "minor" thing, where we deploy only once a few of them have been done, (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277918 |
This is a bit of a different case. Users without editing abilities are already send to suggest edits. If you want to add mod-only (red) tags, better flag the post. Will add a full answer later. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277887 |
It was this suggested edit that got applied: https://electrical.codidact.com/posts/suggested-edit/11. Likely you changed the tags or title, hence it isn’t shown. However, this is just a theory I can’t verify (right now). (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277875 |
@Olin Lathrop sure. I’d advocate a separate comment page, where the annotations would be shown inline. (And not on the Post Page, but with a link somewhere to the other page) (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277875 |
@Moshi "Something like ⮪ or ⮌ ? (I'm aware you were just listing possible examples, just was curious what you envisioned)" yes, something like that. (BTW it's somehow ironic, that I need to quote you in a post about quotes :D) (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277875 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Allow block quotes in comments When I first read that post, I thought "no way" and added a downvote quite quickly. But as I'm thinking more about it, the whole idea seems more useful to me and I started becoming inventive. I'm seeing two main "problems" here: 1. Comments are shorter than posts. Hence they need to be less str... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277841 |
@manassehkatz no it isn't. It's the list from https://github.com/codidact/community-list/blob/master/communities.json (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277570 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Was score system changed? There was an error in the recalculation script that accidentally switched the reputation levels between questions (+5 for upvote) and answers (+10 for upvote). This has been fixed now and a full recalc has been done. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277561 |
Post edited: |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277561 |
Post edited: There is definitely a bug here. It's on our list and we are investigating. |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277379 |
@MathPhysics I see that you are on our dev chat server on Discord. Can you take a screenshot and post it there? (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277553 |
@MathPhysics but that’s not “basic functionality” IMO. They are “nice to have”, but they don’t render the site unusable. Searching for example exists, it just could be implemented better as a search bar in the header. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277553 |
"I see that this website lacks some basic features" - which do you mean? You need to keep in mind though that we do not intend to "copy SE", but to develop a next-gen Q&A software. Some features have hence been intentionally omitted. OTOH I don't see, what's missing and *really* important. You can as... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277379 |
No repro from me either. Could you add a screenshot of comments from you having no edit/delete options? FWIW the only issue I can imagine by looking at the source code is, that you are for some reason considered logged-out. Are you still signed in after doing this action? (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277527 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How can one remove their account ? For now it's probably the best to email us. Our E-Mail is info at codidact.org. We'll likely ask you some verification questions (such as adding something to your profile text to verify it's you and informing you, that the decision cannot be reverted) and we'll likely miss you, before we delete yo... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277507 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: "recent deletions" moderator tool produces error Oooh. This looks like a funny issue. As far as I can tell, there are two levels here: 1. The error page contains an entry for a help center article. This isn't supposed to happen and is likely a data error. We (read: ArtOfCode) have to look at the database, whether there is somewhere an article... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277475 |
You are lucky, that the tool searches for the right user (and you don't actually end up suspending yourself). :D (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277447 |
(cc from my comment on aCVn's post) FWIW mods can add close reasons per-site. So this would be definitely possible. For now, I could also change the text on this site only. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277459 |
FWIW mods can add close reasons per-site. So this would be definitely possible. For now, I could also change the text on this site only. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277424 |
@Dani shouldn't be supported. Take a look at my user profile. I added a `<span>` around "deploys" and added a `<style>` tag that should give every element an outline. Both are scrubbed from the HTML, as you can see from the html inspector / the no effect. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277384 |
FWIW the number of posts and of helpful flags will be seen soon by everyone and a flag histroy is already available (click "x flags" link in your profile) (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277424 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: What html tags can we use in posts? For obvious reasons, we do not allow you to use any tag or attribute you want. All tags, that aren't on a special inclusion list are stripped from the input. There are two lists, one for posts and one for comments. Posts (Question, Answer, Article, IIRC user profiles; so generally everything lo... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277346 |
@DonielF Yes via `<details>` for everything and within that `<summary>` for the title. And no, not everything goes. There is a whitelist. :D (edit: added `` ` `` around the tags to prevent the sanitizer from catching them) (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277348 |
However, to allow for transparency, we must provide reasons, as far as we can, to the moderator and the panel. This is a sub-case of Art. 22, so the panel may publish a redacted version of the reasons. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277348 |
Exception 2 is, when there is a reason, why a person cannot be moderator (generally legal obligations, but also other cases, that might (though likely and hopefully won't) arise). This case may not be reviewed by the Panel, because it cannot have the ability to legally bind Codidact, except in some s... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277348 |
The article has one main meaning with two exceptions: It says, that (besides resignation and inactivity (of course)) only the P. can remove the moderator status. Exception 1 is, that in emergency cases (mod starts mass-deleting good accounts, whatever else you might imagine), the Codidact team may te... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277347 |
The purpose of the chairperson is to lead the "meetings" of the Panel / to organize it's work. It might also choose the reporter (or decide, how it is chosen), but that's within the self-organization. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #276642 | Question closed | — | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277346 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Second Iteration of Drafting the Codidact Arbitration & Review Panel About a month ago I shared our first draft for a Review Panel. Read through that post to find the motivation for this idea: > It should be clear that such a process shouldn't involve "us" (the Codidact team), but rather "you" (the community). Hence, at some point, it was decided on the old forum t... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277314 |
@Harel13 none besides those mentioned in my post ;) (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277314 |
@Harel13 it doesn't specifically symbolize administrator, similar to SE's mod diamond. It's just a sign someone (I think @ArtOfCode) chose when setting up the sites; maybe because there are two variants (filled and unfilled). It could be changed to any other Unicode character (hence @manassehkatz's p... (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277314 |
Post edited: address comments |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277314 |
@msh210 okay, will do later today. (more) |
— | over 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277314 | Initial revision | — | over 4 years ago |