« first day (3914 days earlier)      last day (15 days later) » 

2:04 AM
 
 
5 hours later…
6:49 AM
32 messages moved to Chimney
 
Ok, one of my two troublesome questions posted ;)
 
@JourneymanGeek link or it didn't happen
I'm digging up an old post of Shog regarding Triage, to use that as an answer on the discovery thing
 
1
Q: Pondering a 'better' model of site creation - can we encourage more generalist sites?

Journeyman GeekWhile the most recent round of changes were meant to improve the chances of successful site proposals, I feel its useful to revisit it. We're past the point of rapid growth in site numbers - and a significant number of new sites seem to be related to cryptocurrency. While I'm not going to commen...

this is the easier of the two ;)
 
Well it just an open invitation to discussion, not something anyone can really be "against"
 
It also touches on fundamental network mechanics
eh, I'm not scared of downvotes or what people think
I'm more concerned about putting my thoughts into accurate words :D
Or @DavidPostill poking entirely correct holes in my example :D
 
7:04 AM
@JourneymanGeek 😈
I'm struggling to find a better example
 
I'll settle for "if it didn't exist" .... I was really thinking of a hypothetical gadget site but that example felt more concrete
 
The problem would be defining "gadget"
 
Well in the past - it would be stuff like Mp3 players and other single purpose gadgets
these days its all a phone
IOT's a closer example I guess and other smart appliances
I was also thinking 'dumb' TVs
 
@JourneymanGeek How about AudioVisual - TVs (smart or dumb), Projectors, Home Cinema, Amplifiers, CD/DVD players, Tuners, Remote Controls, other HiFi equipment?
 
@DavidPostill well - these days thats retro and niche :D
I'll play dumb for now on that
 
7:19 AM
@JourneymanGeek So is RetroComputing and that is thriving.
 
@JourneymanGeek HiFi, is a real geeky thing I think. My FiL is really into it
 
@DavidPostill I mean, I could see it as a site but not a great example in this specific case
 
Goes back to lurking
 
So, basically... there's already 170+ sites that can potentially answer your question... Either you have a question that can go on there, or you end up with something niche XD
 
@Tinkeringbell well that's the counterpoint
we cover everything already except every variety of cryptocurrency
 
7:21 AM
I like the idea of generalizing, but I'm not sure if more generalizing will work: There's already sites with overlapping scopes...
@JourneymanGeek Basically, yes. And the things we don't cover are also the things that don't really make good questions....
"How is babby formed"
 
@Tinkeringbell biology site ;)
 
@Tinkeringbell well the trick is finding the appropriate level of specialisation
 
@Luuklag True :P
@JourneymanGeek Yeah. Sort not only by topic, but also by size...
A few small cryptocurrency sites can possibly work together. But it becomes a problem if their questions start getting drowned out by ethereum and bitcoin users...
 
@Tinkeringbell on the other hand that's a great use of tags + there's many common problems
 
Yeah, it can work..
I was just making up examples ;)
 
 
1 hour later…
8:30 AM
Wow, 5 spam answers by the same person on that question there ˆ
@JNat lets start a new backlog of cross site spammers: stackexchange.com/users/21368138/ledp-pabna-wd-05?tab=accounts
Tink, Journey, content dispute again here: meta.stackexchange.com/posts/363547/revisions....
 
@Luuklag I'll leave it to @JourneymanGeek, I have an answer there. It's good for my reputation if that thing keeps being bumped :P
 
@Tinkeringbell I already put a delete vote on it ;)
So don't get too attached to your rep ;)
 
@Luuklag You know, I'm liking you a lot less now that you have that privilege :P
 
lol
Well, I've rolled back and I don't think any further action is needed
@Luuklag Also probably better to flag those
 
8:48 AM
@JourneymanGeek no a 365 day suspension sounds plenty
@JourneymanGeek yeah, you're right. Or just do a rollback a few times more so we get the auto flag ;)
 
@Luuklag least in theory, context is useful here
and Tink can't touch it cause she's got a conflict of interest so I can sneak in a few flags to keep my flag handling lead :D
 
@JourneymanGeek Hah! So you noticed...
 
@Tinkeringbell the benefit of not having a job I guess ;)
 
@Luuklag .... actually
I probably do a lot more flag handling when I'm not waiting to steal my own job
 
9:10 AM
@Luuklag I caught up to him pretty well the last week, I already did 8 more flags than him ;)
Just 5 or so more, and I'll have handled more flags for the entire month too ;)
 
@JNat another one for the sink ;) It's filling quickly again: stackexchange.com/users/21368556/user9983?tab=accounts
These spammers getting creative, joined 3 sites today
 
 
1 hour later…
10:32 AM
Nice answer on the reviews @Tinkeringbell
 
10:45 AM
@Luuklag Thanks! It felt almost like ranting/rambling, glad to know it's appreciated
 
11:37 AM
@Luuklag gone
@Luuklag gone
@Luuklag gone
there, no backlog
...for now, I know
 
haha thx Jnat :)
 
 
1 hour later…
12:48 PM
"Backlog... backlog never changes"
 
I put "Backlog" in my backlog
 
1:29 PM
@MetaAndrewT. back log?
 
back log in bag lock!?
 
1:47 PM
yup
bracing self for downvotes
 
Rob
2:13 PM
@ShadowTheVaccinatedWizard Very cropped:
or Photoshopped.
 
2:30 PM
@Rob Probably one from the same series, if you look at the URL's they jump by quite a few numbers, so there are dozens of pictures in between I guess.
 
Rob
2:40 PM
@Luuklag True: further down the road.
 
yeah, nice comparison, shadows match up perfectly
 
35 messages moved to Chimney
 
3:46 PM
Noticed some suspect user behavior on Arqade. At the very least, it is somehow rude, at worst could be something related to socks.
Any mods wanting to give it a look (already mentioned on the site chat, waiting for reply) ?
Otherwise, I will just drop a flag there
 
🤔
 
You should drop a flag there anyway
 
 
1 hour later…
5:10 PM
@SPArcheon IIRC there are no Arqade mods here
 
5:41 PM
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog I wish I could do that! Though, technically, I could possibly manage a day or two if I can clear my calendar of meetings.
 
 
2 hours later…
8:01 PM
I have to dismiss that review thing on every site? Oof.
 
Thank you for reviewing, times 340 ....
 
8:20 PM
i mean
you don't have to
only if you want to go to that page
 
169 sites + 170 metas * 6 queues = 2034 dismissals?
 
Rob
8:55 PM
I believe that the idea is that it might take a few years from now until someone has reviewing privileges on a particular site; and that the terms of agreement, or manner of reviewing, may be different or changed on a site by site basis; versus the time at which you agree. --- So not only could a clicked-away agreement return, you are agreeing to have read each one and comply with the terms. --- Like a Mod agreement.
A clickwrap or clickthrough agreement is a digital prompt that offers individuals the opportunity to accept or decline a digitally-mediated policy. Privacy policies, terms of service and other user policies, as well as copyright policies commonly employ the clickwrap prompt. Clickwraps are common in signup processes for social media services like Facebook, Twitter or Tumblr, connections to wireless networks operated in corporate spaces, as part of the installation processes of many software packages, and in other circumstances where agreement is sought using digital media. The name "clickwrap...
 
i mean... in this case it goes away even if you right click behind it
it's most certainly not any kind of formal agreement to comply
 

« first day (3914 days earlier)      last day (15 days later) »