Tavern on the Meta

Rob

3:01 PM

Sha, the line is from this:

Chamillionaire ft. Krayzie Bone - Ridin' (Official Video)

►

Shadow9

@Rob which of the lines? lol

Rob

IO - Posts "Ridin' " video.

Shadow9

@It'sOver trolling?

hmm

Not copy&paste but pretty close...

Rob

@Shadow9 This one:

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 now, since when you know Furious Destroyer? I mean, I mentioned him multiple time, but... I don't exactly expect you to remember:P

in Kirin Village Outskirts on The Stack Exchange Network Chat, Nov 22 '19 at 11:45, by Derpy

suspicious looking equines continue to pop out randomly in Pat videos...

Shadow9

3:08 PM

@BlueSoul is it the same Pat?

Guess he got furious when breaking up from Jen...

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 yep, and that is indeed "SuperGirlyGamer" Jen

Shadow9

hehe

BlueSoul

and before you ask, yep, the pony in the picture is indeed a MLP character.

Celestia, to be precise.

Shadow9

This user use the first three letters of my real name! flagging

:D

@BlueSoul how can you tell? Colors only?

So if you make a yellow character, will it be @M.A.R? ;)

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 colors patterns, the stylized sun shaped cutie mark on the flank, the fact that other ponies had appeared in previous videos (if it is yellow, with a pink mane and has some butterflies cutie mark... it probably is Fluttershy)

the fact that there is a never finished mod for minecraft that adds ponies from MLP and I can recognize the character model from there... it is also a clue :P

also... ouch.

Can you please let me know if you have obtained consent from all the users whose names and avatars you are currently featuring on your home page and in the reputation leagues? If you have not obtained express consent from these users, then you seem to be in violation of your own policy. Why does the policy for featuring questions on Meta not apply to Stack Exchange's own home page? — Cody Gray 12 hours ago

To be fair, one could indeed argue that I never asked to be mentioned on the blog for a knitting post.... But it is also true that I don't really mind.

Shadow9

3:19 PM

@BlueSoul oh, missed the cutie mark

JAD

\o/ yay for pedantry

Shadow9

@BlueSoul staff don't need consent, it's proved already.

You sign unwritten agreement when you submit something to SE.

Rob

Consent: stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service#licensing

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 look, even in the "SE is Evil" scenario, it would be a little pathetic for me to ask to remove the name from the blog and to replace it with a link to the meta post where the same name is visible anyway. I was pointing out that.

Shadow9

I know

BlueSoul

3:22 PM

I mean, ok - no one asked for permission to be mentioned as "more hats user" or "better artwork", "more rep" and so on... but that is a little lame to nitpick on.

Shadow9

But on the other hand, suppose you delete your account, or even just change name. The name you had when posting that answer will be forever in the blog.

BlueSoul

Other concerns - like the dog ones - are a tad more compressible than this.

Shadow9

Could also be funny if a name with "SE is evil" or any other such form will make it to such a blog.

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 that is a different thing - the name I had was clearly made up. If they mentioned something that possibly was a real name I would expect that one could ask to anonymize that.

I would also expect that if said user is annoyed by their real name being on the blog, they wouldn't use that as the display name for their user either, but errors happen.

Shadow9

@BlueSoul I'm not in favor of such things. If one use their real name as their display name, it means they're fine with having their real name exposed. Otherwise, simply don't use your real name. Of course to a limit, when bashing a user in the media, no names should be mentioned at all - nick or real.

BlueSoul

3:27 PM

To be fair, the only thing that I would have added if I was SE in that regard was a notification that I was mentioned. Could even just be Yaakov sending a message over chat, no need for a specific feature.

Rob

Use the name: "RichardIsLongFor", problem solved.

Shadow9

@BlueSoul hehe. Funny, this makes me see Yaakov as the new Shog. Bridge between SE and the simple users.

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 Yep, I also expect that BUT I am fine if the user later realize they prefer to hide the name for any reason.

Shadow9

@BlueSoul well same can apply also to non-real display names.... as they can lead to people finding them via Google.

(after they delete/change names)

BlueSoul

@Shadow9 yep, that is also worth considering and to be fair I think that once someone got Shog to anonymize a blog post for that very reason.

Rob

3:31 PM

@BlueSoul Don't be a Ghyslain Raza

People will recognize the name.

terdon

@Shadow9 Of course. And if that was really what the company cared about, they would have done something about it.

60

Q: Users need to be able to remove themselves and all their data from the site

Many users no longer feel safe participating here and don't feel comfortable with SE having data about them. While there is a way to delete your account which will result in all your posts being dissociated and your username replaced with a generic "userNNNN", that isn't enough. Your old userna...

But since this is just a thinly veiled attempt to let the company unfeature posts that are not complimentary towards SO Inc, we get the silly excuse about suddenly caring about users' privacy.

Shadow9

Probably ^

terdon

To be fair, the CMs have been adamant that this isn't the case and that it isn't about hiding criticism. Cesar spent around 2 hours yesterday in the Teacher's Lounge trying to convince us. And I do believe he believes it is true. I just don't believe he (or any of the CMs) can speak for the company any more.

The CMs are decent, caring and empathetic people. So I am quite willing to believe that their only objective is to protect users from unwanted publicity. I just don't believe that the company cares about that for a second.

Shadow9

One thing I also don't get is how they choose who post answer to such a thing. Do they flip a coin, knowing the post will be downvoted to oblivion, and below? Usually in a real FAQ, the one who post the FAQ question also post the initial answer, then others edit it over time.

Not that it matters, just a bit odd.

terdon

I would just go "OK, so who still has a positive score on meta? You're up!"

SE is evil

3:40 PM

@Shadow9 you need two different users to be able to accept the answer and pin it to the top

Shadow9

@terdon lol

SE is evil

which is kinda important when the answer is likely to be downvoted

Shadow9

@SEisevil FAQ needs only one answer

Still, this is a non elegant hack

Mithical

FAQ should also be community-wiki.

Shadow9

@Mithical true, guess they just forgot

(CW will act in their favor, stop the rep being drained)

Journeyman Geek

3:42 PM

@Shadow9 I would assume they hope for a more positive response

SE is evil

Posting as FAQ also doesn't leave a good spot for feedback

Shadow9

@JourneymanGeek it's essentially "We're going to remove the featured tag by force, bypassing the moderators", how can it be accepted positively?

Journeyman Geek

@Shadow9 well sorta

Shadow9

Everything else in there is just synthetic sugar and fake candies.

"getting consent"? Come on, who will do it? And that's just one examplle.

Journeyman Geek

@Shadow9 there's a few wrinkles there, especially considering the earliest drafts

Shadow9

3:45 PM

If one leaves SE, it usually means they don't want to be bothered anymore, and asking "Hey, can I have your consent to post about you? You must also send it to SE to prove it's legit" is quite bothering.

terdon

@JourneymanGeek The earliest draft was "We will not allow mod resignation posts specifically to be featured for more than 24h because we said so".

SE is evil

@terdon you mean the previous published policy?

Journeyman Geek

@Shadow9 s/because we said so/because we look bad

Transcript for