@ShadowThePrincessWizard I have encountered an argument that blatant attempts to break the rules are actually requests for permission. That is, if SE "should have known" that UniKitty and UniDoggy were socks but failed to take action, then they implicitly consented to the sock behavior.
popping in, in case anyone is interested (Cerberus originally asked about this) - 1 month now and 0 response on my GDPR request. As I'm in US - there is nothing I can do but there you have it
It seems from responses in here that SE doesn't have my address (despite the way I had to opt-out of something) but it does nothing to ease my mind on the threats of violence I've been getting with links to Meta.SE. Bye and thanks for all the fish
@StevoisiaksupportsMonica I don't think the conversation was actually about anybody getting suspended for socks recently. It just happened to come up. Though I could have missed something.
@πάνταῥεῖ It's not that simple, the method is secret. As for connection with comments isn't really possible, there's multiple Bots in this chatroom doing exactly that; and they don't have the same access and permissions as The Machine.
This is why when an old account is deleted it takes a while, they have to properly verify the votes before they fix them, then people see 'User was deleted' messages and a change in people's rep. (With associated trombone).
I just got a refund from a while ago, where I seemingly received inexplicable downvotes; not that a few points here or there matters, but it's both the principle and a win for the software.
i mean, you may have intended the comment for the people viewing the post, not the op, but the op is the one who gets pinged by it. they're the target.
Absolutely. When I VTC a question, I almost never want to enter into a conversation with the OP about whether their question is a duplicate. Especially in the vast majority of cases, which are unsalvageable zero effort debug-me questions. — RaedwaldOct 29 at 12:56
@StevoisiaksupportsMonica I don't think the old comment looked like something automated. I think it looks to us like it's automated because we know it is.
I think the new duplicate comment wording is better, since most of the new users would relate possible duplicate rather to their exact question wording, than to an existing answer for the same problem found elsewhere.
Since editing the automatic comment is allowed, I'd expect someone to come up with a user script that immediately edits the comment to the old form or a different form.
I just came across the new duplicate notice "does this answer your question", the only point I've found is this, with which I agree, but not which I came here for. When the questions are exactly the same, honestly the new wording comes off as passive aggressive, because they are the same. Is this something to raise in the linked post, or a standalone post? Any suggestions? Thanks.
but I'm compiling all known issues related to this Comment in my answer there
@Catija re: specifically: I am not sure what the actual ask is here, but the new language is status-bydesign. One of the posts that you linked to has some good anecdotal evidence related to this change. – Yaakov Ellis♦ 2 days ago
I added in an actual Ask; would like that tagged status:bydesign
it seems like Sonic's recent post could be expanded to enumerate all "Does this Answer your question" edge cases such as same-author and no-answers: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/340009/…