Conversation started Jul 23, 2018 at 5:59.
Jul 23, 2018 05:59
I'm afraid you missed the point of the question. It's not "why it's still 50", it's "Why it was 50 to begin with?" (and most likely OP expecting staff only answers) — Shadow Wizard 10 hours ago
@Shadow Just to be absolutely clear here, the purpose of my question is NOT "why was it 50 to begin with". Rather, I'm asking why the decision was made to keep the limit as is rather than modify it. Either they just didn't bother with it, or they made a careful study based on data long after 2008 and decided it was best to keep the status quo.
I want an answer from staff that either simply states it was the former, or if the latter, discloses at least some useful information from their study. (cc @JourneymanGeek)
ah hah
you solved another mystery cc @ShadowWizard
@JourneymanGeek What?
;p
not that important
@Undo They could have printed a neon warning label on every single page that the CoC doesn't change rule enforcement and people would still say it does.
@Shadow Imagine replacing all instances of 50 in the FAQ to 75. Will it still make sense (other than the mere fact that it mismatches system behavior)? Yes. Now, replace it with 25, or 100. Will it still make sense? Yes.
It's not a duplicate because it doesn't explain why the number has to be 50.
Jul 23, 2018 06:13
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog fair enough, I think it's dupe now, explained in the comment.
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog so it can be added as "branch" of the faq, I still can't see any reason for a separate question.
@ShadowWizard But the FAQ doesn't answer the question, and how can I get staff to answer that question? By pinging Shog?
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog by editing the faq question to include it, and well you already pinged Shog about it, so if he want to reply, he'll see it closed as dupe and he can edit his official response in the faq answer, or reopen your question and post the answer there.
It can also be reopened by others, I'm only one person, and others might agree with you and disagree with me, all good.
@Shadow Since you edited the tags, you shouldn't have been permitted to use your Chaos Emerald. Why did the system allow it?
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog imagine replacing every instances of 50 with 314 ....
@JourneymanGeek The question would still make sense.
Jul 23, 2018 06:19
would it?
It would still be a valid argument for setting it to 314.
@JourneymanGeek oh, you missed all the fun.. he trolled MSE big time with useless rants, got several of those nuked as Rude/Abusive, and later network suspension since he already did all of this before, on other sites as well. Still, I don't think flagging "lol" in chat was justified, but... meh.
would it be a distinct question?
ohhh
Oh
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog because you rolled back my edit.
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog I suspect you wont get an answer besides "It was arbitrarily decided to work that way and it's worked fine so far so nobody has touched it
Jul 23, 2018 06:21
@ShadowWizard Evidence?
Maybe if you'd edit the tags, not roll back, I couldn't use the hammer.
15 mins ago, by Sonic the Inclusive Hedgehog
I want an answer from staff that either simply states it was the former, or if the latter, discloses at least some useful information from their study. (cc @JourneymanGeek)
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog of what? That you rolled back? It's in the revisions.
I remember him
@ShadowWizard That rolling back a tag edit would allow Chaos Emerald use once again.
Jul 23, 2018 06:22
@ShadowWizard I'm an optimist and hope people change
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog well, you just saw a proof. Feature of bug? I can't really tell.
I am also often disappointed ;)
Feel free to submit support/bug about it, @Sonic.
Guess they never tested all possible cases.... :)
(IMO it's fine, since rolling back is 100% undo of the edit, turning the tags back to their original form.)
@JourneymanGeek they rarely do. But yeah, we can always hope! :)
There was excellent chapter of Dexter about it. Anyone here watch that TV show?
Jul 23, 2018 06:28
@ShadowWizard I found an answer by Shog explaining the true criteria. This is documented incorrectly in several other posts (the changelog, the FAQ, etc.)
What you do watch? @Journeyman
at the moment, I have a massive backlog of stuff
mostly scifi and super hero series ;p
@SonictheInclusiveHedgehog huh, nice find. Time for Ano to strike with bunch of edits, I guess. ;)
but been too... meh to catch up lately
@JourneymanGeek Too Broad ;)
Jul 23, 2018 06:30
hmm
Smallville, I assume?
the DC stuff - Arrow, Legends of Tommorrow, The Flash
I prefer Marvel. :)
Killjoys, and the expanse. Was watching dark matter before it got killed off
DC is odd
DC's stuff is great serialised
but they keep wanting to make movies and failing hard
@JourneymanGeek agree about movies, yeah.
Jul 23, 2018 06:31
The arrow is basically the batman series they wished they could make ;)
I don't particularly enjoy TV series
I don't even own a TV anymore
@JourneymanGeek What do you think? Is my question a duplicate?
@JourneymanGeek Why do you think so? My question is not answered in the FAQ.
we already talked about this in depth yesterday
Jul 23, 2018 06:36
@JourneymanGeek Summarize please
Well, that its a number that works and demanding in depth reasons to why things work isn't very productive
a lot of these numbers might have been set arbitrariliy, and there's no great big amount of reseach behind it
@JourneymanGeek Once again, I'm not asking why the number was set in the first place. I'm asking why was it kept. Either they didn't bother to change it, or did some research and decided to keep the status quo. If the former, they should answer stating so. If the latter, they should disclose their research.
"they should"
erm, dude, no one owes you attention or answers
@JourneymanGeek Then go ahead, leave it unanswered. But it's not a duplicate of the FAQ.
My specific question is not answered there.
Its kept cause it wasn't changed
Jul 23, 2018 06:40
@JourneymanGeek Evidence?
Its still 50
@JourneymanGeek Simply supplying an answer here isn't proof that it's a duplicate.
shrug
Yanno what? I didn't want to closehammer it.
Now? I might if it get reopened
The outwardly evident reason is that nobody saw fit to change it yet
@JourneymanGeek It doesn't say in the FAQ that "this is set to 50 because... [Jeff decided on it back in 2008 and it was never changed]".
Jul 23, 2018 06:41
Why be so hung up about it?
@Magisch Because the fact is, it isn't a dupe.
Do you need a specific explaination for every threshold on the site?
I have theories, but they might go against be nice and the COC.
@Magisch Fine, don't answer my question. But it's not a dupe.
I'll share once I can cool down, and maybe say it diplomatically
Jul 23, 2018 06:42
@JourneymanGeek I picture the agitated ash barking video :P
@JourneymanGeek Are you gonna vote to reopen?
its already closed
Absolutely not
@JourneymanGeek In that case, why do you believe the dupe mark is valid?
Clearly you must have read it, and made a decision. I want to know why you made that decision.
Jul 23, 2018 06:44
... I do not need to explain myself to you all the time.
I have the perfect interlude to defuse this situation
Because its feeding the very behaviour that annoys me
and the quickest way is... not the right way as far as I'm concerned.
I wonder why you are intent on annoying journeyman when he has said multiple times that he is and doesn't want to answer.
cause the quickest way is to kick you till you stop
and its unethical for me to do so
and I'm unsure how to get through to you that this behaviour is annoying for all involved
I might take my own advice, let the other ROs know, then put you on ignore.
That would work
May 14 at 22:34, by Catija
Why would I mute you? Sort of defeats the purpose of being an RO.
 
Conversation ended Jul 23, 2018 at 6:49.