@hey Overarching bug: top bar doesn't exclude items specific users are ineligible to review (because they own it, they cast a vote or flag externally, they don't have enough rep to review specific tasks, etc.)
@user5389107 not retired as far as I know, although, it isn't exactly very "nice" to call someone... not exactly wrong in describing behavior though.
The refiner badge is freaking hard, I don't know how anyone got Illuminator without having known about it for years and just slowly trudging towards it.
(maybe that is why only 92 out of 9 million users have it)
On a side note, wtf??? 8.8 million SO users? I remember when it was 3 million. What does the graph of that growth rate look like?
mind blown
^tp
no anime moderators on to nuke user :(
Would have thought more people would be around Monday in the middle of the night :P
Well, technically the policy is as written, and you implicitly accept it. So, if it states the policy in that new section (I didn't read all of it) then yes, it is officially live.
@user5389107 Nice. Well, I mean, I wish users would not be help vampires. At the same time, I can understand how that type of branding could perhaps contribute to a negative environment. Users label things that annoy them, kind of hard to get away from it, and removing the label will more than likely just give rise to another one, or a set of them.
@TravisJ Well yeah, but if the goal of your FAQ post is to get people who were Q-banned to work on fixing their behavior, calling them help vampires doesn't exactly improve your chances now, does it?
> Harpooning is where someone is disciplined so severely in a verbal manner that they are figuratively "harpooned" to the ground. These people will feel very disenfranchised to the community and to those who contributed to the harpooning.
As stated in the about links on every page, Stack Exchange is a network of question and answer sites, not help forums. This implies that all posts are expected to have value for later visitors, in addition to helping the asker. To enforce that, and to prevent help vampires from making the answerers turn away from the community, low-quality questions and answers are blocked. This includes posts from:
users who can't be bothered to form sentences users who don't do the most basic kinds of research themselves
If I was presented that on the heels of a ban it'd at least sting
Maybe that's justified (you did earn that ban after all) but it might not be conducive to change behavior
decoupling fairness from utility for a sec, maybe rewriting it to be more utilitarian and less confrontational could serve to get fewer people to annoy others on meta
Why am I getting this message?
As stated in the about links on every page, Stack Exchange is a network of question and answer sites, not help forums. This implies that all posts are expected to have value for later visitors, in addition to helping the asker. To enforce that, and to prevent help ...
I have to agree @user5389107, that really should be edited. It needs to have the order changed around so that users get the "what can I do" part first, and then the other stuff later.
Most users, once banned, probably know they beat some fun with a monkey at that point.
I mean, yeah, you agree that if your data is lost to some hacker you can't legally do anything about it, but really, what could you do anyway? If you had a real lawyer you would have made your own user terms and submitted them for approval separately from the generic one everyone gets grouped with. Barring that, it is just you signing your life, content, and data away. Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along.
Although according to the terms if Stack Exchange does somehow wrong you for less than $100 then they owe you that money back.
Perhaps that is why a class action seems scary. $99... 8.8 million users... first world problems.
> The section and paragraph headings in these Public Network Terms are for convenience only and shall not affect their interpretation.
> If you don’t want to be bound by the arbitration and class-action waiver provisions in this section, you must notify us in writing within thirty (30) days of the date that you first accept these Public Network Terms (unless a longer period is required by applicable law), and then you must litigate any disputes against us in accordance with the "Assignment and Jurisdiction" section below
@TravisJ I'm looking at it from more of a utilitarian perspective - the goal of the post is to get users who were banned to change their behavior and unban themselves.
Confrontational tone doesn't really make that happen. If the goal is to tell people to get out in the most socially acceptable way, the post works. But I hazard that's not the goal.
@user5389107 and yet sadly I don't feel that PR reputation damage control is a worth reason for trying to be nice. Especially if you act like you are pretty annoyed to have to become "all girly, rainbow, hugs and unicorns" because some "annoyance" had to make a tweet post.
You can address some longstanding opportunities for improvement with the site while at the same time getting decent PR
Being nicer to people usually works in that it is more likely to get them to do what you want.
Very few people are convinced to change by insults or confrontational behavior.
You can find the incident that spurred this wrongheaded obnoxious and in bad faith, but at the same time turn it into something positive in the long haul.
And yet right now I seem to see more "fear" than "change". But again, don't worry, that's just probably my perceptions. No need to give them much weight.
People are defensive of stack and intrinsically wary to big change since "don't fix what ain't broke (for what I use it for)" is a valid stance to take
I think a lot of the outrage is due to the ... a little unfortunate ... wording of the blog post, that came across a lot differently then what jay intended
> there's an uproar (because) people are defensive of stack and intrinsically wary to big change since "don't fix what ain't broke (for what I use it for)" is a valid stance to take
^ I meant: do you think there is a problem in this this and if yes, what problem do you see?
@Derpy They don't want change, they want an answer to their question. They don't want downvotes, they want an answer to their question. They don't want clarification comments, they want an answer to their question. They don't want rude comments, they want an answer to their question. They don't want nice comments, they want an answer to their question.
> I feel like we should take a hint from compilers. They tell you what happened in a very precise, non-judgmental way so you can learn and move forward instead of feeling bad or inadequate for making a mistake. -- from Twitter
@Derpy You're probably right. I am prepared to believe that name-calling comments have reduced. I can also believe that comments overall have been reduced, 'rude' or not. I call that a win.
Error #05, multipleDuplicate detected in paragraph 1, question-handling terminated with action downClose vote
Error #06, noResearch detected in paragraph 1, question-handling terminated with action downClose vote
Error #07, missingInputData detected in paragraph 1, question-handling terminated with action downClose vote
Error #08, missingErrorMessages detected in paragraph 1, question-handling terminated with action downClose vote
Error #09 missing outputData in paragraph 1, question-handling terminated with action downClose vote
I made a large list of such error messages, complete with subsections for different languages, but a lot of users did not seem to appreciate the idea, for some reason:)
@hey And then you still have people complaining about crap like this: github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41646 ("#[allow(bad_style)] is a rather rebuke-y shame-y annotation on code.")
If you approach it from an utilitarian perspective you'll get the folks onboat who disagree with the whole surrounding argument of the blog post / the twitter threads
I think a lot of people are afraid SO will turn into a hugbox and quality will suffer. If you approach it from a "rudeness is noise and unconducive to our goal of improving quality" angle it's more likely to garner support.
I think I'll have to agree to disagree by now. To me this argument is mixing two needs: reducing rude behavior on the site and making the site users nicer. Those aren't the same thing.
You probably can reduce rudeness by force, ban threats and the such. Or by tricking them with a "different" utilitarian approach (rudeness is noise, like suggested before). That said, if your purpose was to make them understand the value of being nice... that is a whole different problem fear won't probably be able to solve
That said... I am sorry to have started this long argument. Especially since as I said before right now I can't really say I care what direction we will take.
> oh, BTW, errata: the ToS does refer to the ability of opting out via an e-mail
I had it as "I have found a meta post that claims that Blog Overflow doesn't exist anymore"
also....
> Send an e-mail to [email protected] with the subject of 'opt out of arbitration' and a link to your profile in the body. That's it, we'll handle everything from there. You'll get confirmation back via email.
this was taken from Tim original post on meta.
The new ToS :
> Your written notification must be mailed to us at Stack Overflow, Attn: Legal Department, 110 William Street, Floor 28, New York, NY 10038 or by email notification at legal (at) stackoverflow.com. If you do not notify us in accordance with this paragraph, you agree to be bound by the terms of this section, including, without limitation, the arbitration and class-action waiver provisions, and also including such provisions in any modifications we make to these Public Network Terms after the date of your first acceptance. Such notification must include: (i) your name; (ii) your email addres…
as you can see, it contradicts the previous message (legal (at) stackoverflow.com VS team (at) stackoverflow.com)
I'm sorry about this confusion, sometimes it's hard to make sure I'm in places where I get hit with all of the information I need (polling for it has become increasingly obsolete as we've grown in size). Please, nobody freak out over the ToS update stuff / emails not matching / not getting a reply for e-opt out immediately I'm looking into all of it.
@TimPost I empathize. I have to handle this in my company and even in a small B2B client only organization it's a giant crapfest and disorganized as hell
FWIW while y'all could certainly do better it's been rather smooth so far
@user5389107 I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees that. I feel like there's been this undercurrent of mistrust for SE over the last weeks that makes me sad. I have a huge amount of trust for SE and I generally attribute any missteps to oversights or communication issues rather than malice.
@TimPost Question: have you checked that you were indeed the one that pulled out the shortest straw? If I were you, I would check if some other staff member cheated in the drawing for the prestigious position of "ToS change manager" -_-'
@Mgetz don't underestimate the comics, too. If anything, just because they are even more over the top than the actual show. the writers there simply don't limit themselves.
@user5389107 oh, the art style is just "keep it cheap". Flash based in order to keep animation costs low. Yet far better than the older generations by far
@Mgetz I think they discussed that too, then decided to keep it because it was one of the thing that wasn't trademarked.
To be fair, I am not sure the actual game even mention the name, so it would be easy to switch.
also, it it the name of the game. They don't hide that they took inspiration from the show. They just don't use much of the show actual content other than some similarities and general concepts.
@user5389107 and before I forget what I was saying... As for the writing, you probably would be surprised by some of the episode plots. While most of them are indeed of the "slice of life" kind, there are a good amount of weird ones that you wouldn't expect in a "kid show"
like a remake of the Harrison Bergeron story, for example
@Mgetz If you ever get the opportunity, get an hold on the "Siege of the Crystal Empire" story ark of the comic (which gives Sombra the backstory he deserved and a much nicer ending) or the Accord one.
the chickens have left, the cat is missing. Also I already had my share of annoyed users yelling because of the avatar (on other rooms, do yourself a favor and spare yourself the time to attempt to track them down) , I don't feel the need to annoy anyone here.
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has an amusing section on the problems associated with verb tenses when time travel is involved. It has several examples which appear to be constructed for their humorous sound instead of any attempt at sensible rules.
You can arrive (mayan arrivan on-when...
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has an amusing section on the problems associated with verb tenses when time travel is involved. It has several examples which appear to be constructed for their humorous sound instead of any attempt at sensible rules.
You can arrive (mayan arrivan on-when...