Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications
-
@Zerosquare said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@JBert said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@loopback0 OK, this might blow your mind, but did you know that Jeff Atwood worked there?
Not only he did, but I've seen several comments saying "this would never have happened when Jeff was there!".
Conveniently, those comments all fail to mention that it'd be because every thread discussing the Mod Bannening would be insta-deleted and all users commenting in or upvoting comments in them would be perma'd.
-
@loopback0 said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
TIL "delete votes" are a thing.
Not only are they a thing, they are the main tool for dealing with spam and non-answers. So basically by casting a delete vote, the caster is saying the post does not answer, and does not even make an attempt to answer, the question.
-
@Bulb said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@loopback0 said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
TIL "delete votes" are a thing.
Not only are they a thing, they are the main tool for dealing with spam and non-answers. So basically by casting a delete vote, the caster is saying the post does not answer, and does not even make an attempt to answer, the question.
In other words, those votes are abusive. Ironical, considering the topic of this meta-discussion.
-
@izzion said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@Zerosquare said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@JBert said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@loopback0 OK, this might blow your mind, but did you know that Jeff Atwood worked there?
Not only he did, but I've seen several comments saying "this would never have happened when Jeff was there!".
Conveniently, those comments all fail to mention that it'd be because every thread discussing the Mod Bannening would be insta-deleted and all users commenting in or upvoting comments in them would be perma'd.
-
@JBert said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
that community
There's two! "Activity" is relative, dontcha know!
-
That reminds me: Where is that setting on NodeBB?
-
-
@Zerosquare said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
Discoverable!
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@JBert said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
that community
There's two! "Activity" is relative, dontcha know!
is not active.
-
A couple days ago Stack Overflow opened up their annual Developer Survey:
Some of the very important questions include:
- Do you feel like part of the community? Why or why not?
- Is the community welcoming? Why or why not?
-
@levicki That is how we got here, after all.
More importantly, I'm 99.99% certain that Commodore 64 BASIC is the next hot language and absolutely told them so! Who needs more than 38911 bytes of memory anyway?
-
Looks like they brought in a new manager, and her introduction post on Meta.SO has not been downvoted into oblivion:
-
Did they just assume my preferred pronoun?
-
@slapout1 second person singular isn't pronouns
-
@Jaloopa What a pronoun-ableist thing of you to say
-
@Jaloopa said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@slapout1 second person singular isn't pronouns
Yes, it is a pronoun; it takes the place of your name. It is an ungendered pronoun, but it is a pronoun.
You is both the second person singular and second person plural personal pronoun in Modern English. In Old and early Middle English, ye was the plural personal subjective-case pronoun and you was the plural objective-case pronoun. Thee and thou were the singular subjective- and objective-case pronouns. By about the 16th Century, the singular/plural difference had been lost; ye/you vs. thee/thou had come to distinguish between formality and intimacy. (Contrary to modern belief, ye/you was used when speaking formally to an elder or person of higher status; thee/thou was used when speaking to a younger or lower class person, or between equals in familial or romantic situations.) By the 17th Century, the thee/thou forms disappeared from most English dialects, although it reportedly still exists in Yorkshire. At some point, but I'm not sure when, the distinction between subjective and objective cases also disappeared, and you became the all-purpose second person personal pronoun.
Youse and y'all are second person plural pronouns in some Modern English dialects. Yours is the second person singular and plural possessive pronoun. Yourself and yourselves are the second person singular and plural reflexive pronouns.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
Youse and y'all are second person plural pronouns in some Modern English dialects
And then there's the people who repeat all this again and use "y'all" as singular and "all y'all" as plural.
-
@topspin said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@HardwareGeek said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
Youse and y'all are second person plural pronouns in some Modern English dialects
And then there's the people who repeat all this again and use "y'all" as singular and "all y'all" as plural.
Hey, don't knock
y'all
andall y'all
. They're great additions to the English language. Much utility in differentiating small groups/subsets from the whole. And the second is basically emphasis--not just some of y'all, but all y'all
-
@HardwareGeek So, did they fire the person who wrote that blog post?
-
@Benjamin-Hall y'all'nt've
-
@topspin said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
"all y'all"
It's a sabotage.
-
@Watson said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@topspin said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
"all y'all"
It's a sabotage.
I can't stand it...
-
@lolwhat said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@Watson said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@topspin said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
"all y'all"
It's a sabotage.
I can't stand it...
-
@lolwhat said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@Watson said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
@topspin said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
"all y'all"
It's a sabotage.
I can't stand it...
I know you planned it.
-
So, what has the Stack Exchange team been doing?
Seems they implemented an important new feature which the people on their meta site don't seem to appreciate that much:
I understand your reaction but it also somewhat misses that a huge number of users don't have the 15 reputation needed to vote. Voting is amazing. I want more people to vote and to show what answers are great but if you can't vote, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to indicate your appreciation... and people do try to vote. Thousands of votes go uncounted every day from people trying and having their votes rebuffed because they lack the reputation. – Catija♦
Or, you know, you could change the voting logic...
-
: Stop making sense. This is SE we're talking about!
-
Pop quiz:
When dog is bored, he licks his bollocks.
When Windows is bored, it installs updates.
When SE team is bored, they ___________
-
@Applied-Mediocrity fiddle with their CoC?
-
@JBert this is very amusing also for another reason. Let's forget it's about voting for a moment.
The product has some feature that's used very frequently and has always been there since product's creation over a decade ago. But there's one glaring problem with how that feature works that users complained about for years. But it was never fixed because there were million other more important things to take care of. But now that the product matured, there's not much left to do, and finally they could take care of this glaring problem with one of the most basic features. And they did fix it completely - but instead of altering the feature so it doesn't do the wrong thing anymore, they've implemented brand new feature in a different part of the system that partially overlaps with the old feature, but is much less powerful and the old feature is still in place and not deprecated.
Why could they do such thing?
Usually it's because the code of the old feature is such an epic mess that nobody wants to have anything to do with it, so much that they'd rather rewrite everything from scratch than modify one function. I choose to believe that's the case here too.
-
@JBert said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
So, what has the Stack Exchange team been doing?
Seems they implemented an important new feature which the people on their meta site don't seem to appreciate that much:
I understand your reaction but it also somewhat misses that a huge number of users don't have the 15 reputation needed to vote. Voting is amazing. I want more people to vote and to show what answers are great but if you can't vote, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to indicate your appreciation... and people do try to vote. Thousands of votes go uncounted every day from people trying and having their votes rebuffed because they lack the reputation. – Catija♦
Or, you know, you could change the voting logic...
Except the 15 reputation needed to vote is a critical feature of the system. Without that, the site would only drown in trivial questions and answers quicker. In fact it should have probably been raised to 30 at the time they raised the rep for upvote on question from 5 to 10.
-
@JBert said in Stack Exchange experiences Stack Meltdown, by enforcing preferred pronouns in site-wide communications:
Seems they implemented an important new feature which the people on their meta site don't seem to appreciate that much:
It's their attempt to fix this question obviously