Garbage badges, and badges linking to posts



  • Moving discussion from 尼斯帖子的無底洞. Because.

    @HardwareGeek said:

    @PJH said:
    Feel free to suggest criteria for implementing this one on here....

    I'm wondering what their criteria are, and how one might unsuccessfully call something garbage. I also find it interesting that all three were awarded the same day.

    Finally, am I misremembering, or was it not possible in the past to click on a badge to get to the specific post for which it was awarded? If so, when and why was that functionality removed.


    @HardwareGeek said:

    I'm wondering what their criteria are, and how one might unsuccessfully call something garbage.

    Judging from the holders, and from something niggling in the back of my mind, they've all checked something in relating to garbage. I won't descend to cheap jibes here.

    @HardwareGeek said:

    I also find it interesting that all three were awarded the same day.

    It's probably not disimilar to some of the 'joke'/test badges we have on here. 'بول' and 'Badge edirrevO tfeL-ot-thgiR' got awarded on the same day to the same user, for example.

    @HardwareGeek said:

    Finally, am I misremembering, or was it not possible in the past to click on a badge to get to the specific post for which it was awarded? If so, when and why was that functionality removed.

    Automatically awarded Post related badges usually link to the post to which they were awarded.

    The Default [Nice|Good|Great] [Post|Topic] badges and our slightly more meaningful (in the light of threads like (ha!) /t/1000) [Mediocre|Passible|Reasonable] Poster do still link to the post involved, for example. There was a period when this functionality was broken, but the intention was that they do in fact link to the relevant post.

    Manually awarded badges (pendantry, spellar/gramming) however do not.

    I've been trying to get around to making at least the Bronze pedantry (Knight) post-specific and thus link to the post concerned, since it does relate to an individual post. But for the moment, since the badge is directly manually awarded, they don't.

    Naturally, non-post related badges cannot be awarded to a single post, since.. well. Because. Default Trust-Level badges and some of the Community/Getting started fall into this, as does the site specific Attendance and Top Poster badges.



  • It must be the automatic ones I remembered.

    @PJH said:

    I've been trying to get around to making at least the Bronze pedantry (Knight) post-specific
    The whoosh badge is another one that would be nice to link to the relevant post. It was one of those that prompted that question. While continuing to catch up on my reading backlog, I ran across a post in which @boomzilla said a whoosh was so egregious that he awarded the badge without waiting for three flags; I wanted to read this outstanding example of obliviousness, but stymied by the lack of link.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    @boomzilla said a whoosh was so egregious that he awarded the badge without waiting for three flags

    This was the post that whooshed that time (in the lounge, so no oneboxing, and you need to be at least TL3 to go there):

    http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/topic/4909/348?u=boomzilla

    It was much discussed in that thread, and all links went back to that post (of @accalia's). It was annotated and replied with the usual screenshot of the existing flags. But, yeah, a way to link directly to the post would be better yet.


  • SockDev

    -_-

    right there was that one.

    I'll happily own up to my other two wooshes, but that one still annoys me.

    filed under: grump grump mutter grump



  • @accalia said:

    I'll happily own up to my other two wooshes, but that one still annoys me.

    The sign of a good whoosh.



  • @accalia said:

    hat one still annoys me

    Annoyed Fox:


  • SockDev

    @boomzilla said:

    The sign of a good whoosh.

    i'd argue against that, personally.

    Shouldn't a woosh involve the wooshing party recognizing that it was indeed a woosh? every time i reread that exchange it reads very much not like a woosh at all.

    and if anything the post i wooshed on was further upthread than the one i "earned" the woosh on.



  • @boomzilla said:

    This was the post that whooshed that time

    Ah. I had read that one, but did not specifically remember it, much less connect it with your later statement, especially since a few days, I think, had elapsed between reading them.

    I knew two badges were awarded that day, and I knew to whom. In theory, I could have gone through all to posts those two people made that day, but since the people were @accalia and @Luhmann, that would have been far too many posts to bother rereading.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    that would have been far too many posts to bother rereading.

    Don't blame that on me ... my post amount is ... elevated but not astronomical


  • SockDev

    @Luhmann said:

    elevated but not astronomical

    unlike a certain sometimes fox lady's output....

    i mean almost 1.6k eligable posts/month!

    that's an average of 51 and a bit posts/day!

    that lady is crazy active!



  • @accalia said:

    that lady is crazy active!
    :)


  • SockDev

    yes, that too.

    my therapist says i'm getting better.

    it was a good thing i started going to sessions again. Made a huge difference.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    The whoosh badge is another one that would be nice to link to the relevant post.

    It'll work on the same principle. Admin/Mod drops a UUID into the post concerned, sql takes over from there.


  • area_deu

    I see some sweet potential for abuse there ....



  • @aliceif said:

    I see some sweet potential for abuse there ....

    Considering there's only (currently) two of us who can do it - what?



  • psudoSQL I had in mind:

    SELECT * FROM revisions WHERE revision_change BY staff and BEFORE != *UUID* and AFTER == *UUID*


  • area_deu

    Oh ...
    I forgot that you could do that.



  • The staff bit is a solved problem, it's already used in the 2^n and %age poster queries.

    It's the before/after diff bit that's hard (especially including the opposite direction, if you also want to be able to rescind one.)



  • Is there an official process for obtaining an egdaB, or is it just a case of being in the right place at the right time?



  • Yes.



  • Which of the following assertions hold for obtaining an egdaB?

    A. there is an official process
    B. it's a case of being in the right place at the right time

    EDIT: hehe :<happyface>)



  • @tar said:

    Which of the following assertions hold for obtaining an egdaB?

    At least zero of them...


  • SockDev

    a little from Column A, a little from Column 2.



  • Row ¼ would like a word with you....


  • SockDev

    .... SHIMATA! i always forget about her....

    sorry!



  • Must you cause such a row?



  • Does it need to be done on revisions? Can't it just be posts containing %UUID%?
    That way an admin can delete it and the badge is removed?

    What's to stop a user removing it from their own post?

    EDIT: Nevermind, I think the last question answers the first.


  • SockDev

    @loopback0 said:

    What's to stop a user removing it from their own post?

    nothing, but the knowledge that they'd lose the badge. :imp:



  • I answered my own question anyway :disappointed:



  • @PJH said:

    I've been trying to get around to making at least the Bronze pedantry (Knight) post-specific and thus link to the post concerned, since it does relate to an individual post. But for the moment, since the badge is directly manually awarded, they don't.

    Make a SELECT UNION ALL query.

    SELECT 32 user_id, TIMESTAMP('2014-12-25 16:00:00') granted_at, 24567 post_id
    UNION ALL
    SELECT 751 user_id, ....
    

  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @HardwareGeek said:

    Must you cause such a row?

    You seem rankled.



  • @FrostCat said:

    You seem rankled.
    No, but as I get older I'm starting to get wrinkled.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @HardwareGeek said:

    No, but as I get older I'm starting to get wrinkled.

    Do your wrinkles rustle?

    Or wrustle?



  • @loopback0 said:

    Does it need to be done on revisions? Can't it just be posts containing %UUID%?

    The post has to exist to begin with for it to be pendantry or whatever. Thus it has to be written by the original user - i.e. the recipient.

    Others see the post, flag it, then a mod comes along later to add the UUID.

    The act of adding the UUID creates a revision. That's what would be looked at.

    Merely creating a post with a UUID would reference the newly created post, not the original intended post.

    @loopback0 said:

    That way an admin can delete it and the badge is removed?

    Nuh huh - see above

    @loopback0 said:

    What's to stop a user removing it from their own post?

    The edit window. But the SQL wouldn't see that edit, unless the author was staff themselves.


    @riking said:

    Make a SELECT UNION ALL query.

    Bad Ideas thread is over :arrow_upper_right: :arrow_heading_down: :fast_forward: :arrow_lower_left:



  • How about an admin creates a (hidden) post replying to the post which contains the UUID, similar to how flags reply to the base post?



  • See, Blakeyrat makes everybody's life better.


  • SockDev

    @blakeyrat said:

    See, Blakeyrat makes everybody's life better.

    i do not think that is the correct conclusion for this situation.



  • @PleegWat said:

    How about an admin creates a (hidden) post replying to the post which contains the UUID, similar to how flags reply to the base post?

    Actually, something like that might be more workable...

    And it neednt be hidden.

    PseudoSQL...

    SELECT parent_id FROM posts WHERE raw LIKE %uuid% AND author IN staff

    Solves the recscinding problem rather neatly as well...


  • SockDev

    @PJH said:

    Solves the recscinding problem rather neatly as well...

    true.

    would rescind if staff ever got "fired" though.

    not likely to happen around these parts of course. ;-)



  • There are far too many staff on here IMNSHO.

    But that particular WTF is Alex's call, not mine.


  • SockDev

    @PJH said:

    There are far too many staff on here IMNSHO.

    overall, yes. active? that number seems about right. ;-)



  • @PJH said:

    But that particular WTF is Alex's call, not mine.
    FTR: Admins that aren't in the DEVELOPER_EMAILS list can't demote other admins.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.