Tavern on the Meta

Starship

00:52

@bobble Want to help me get through this mess of likely closable questions too? meta.stackexchange.com/…

Jeremy

@JeffAtwood Godspeed. It’s hard to keep hope but seeing your effort at least keeps some spark.

@bobble both are working for me now, but fwiw I think that hiding a site does hide your network profile link on that site.

bobble

@Jeremy hmm, working for me too. Probably a temporary glitch

@Starship sure, I'll throw some CVs at them in the evening (~3hrs from now)

Starship

@bobble thx

Spevacus

01:11

@JeffAtwood 👀

Jeremy

01:29

@Starship delete your account

Starship

@Jeremy ??

Why

Jeremy

You can delete it or I can delete it for you

Starship

@Jeremy Declined. Why? And you can't delete my account

CPlus

01:55

@Jeremy Yeah, why? Having different political views is not cause to delete an account.

M.A.R.

@CPlus he's probably referring to the common refrain from rightists, "if you don't like it, move to another country"

Starship

@M.A.R. What "rightists" say that?

M.A.R.

I can't for the life of me see that far to the right or left. My eyes usually look ahead

@Starship you wanna start an argument, and I don't. So you have a good day.

Starship

@M.A.R. I'm really not. You are saying they are referring some common refrain which I can't imagine anyone but an absolute extremist believing

Jeff Atwood

It's ok to criticize but write a blog post and link me to it. Otherwise, what are you really accomplishing here? Ask yourself that.

Starship

02:01

@JeffAtwood I don't happen to a have huge blog ready to post on :)

Jeff Atwood

a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step

ask me how I know

Starship

@JeffAtwood Fair...

Jeff Atwood

be what you want to see

I don't care about ideologies, I care about results, and other humans

5

CPlus

@JeffAtwood Is this an NAA?

Spevacus

We should ask 2009 Jeff

Jeff Atwood

02:03

define "NAA"

Spevacus

NAA is a (now) common shortening of "not an answer"

Jeff Atwood

fine to delete IMO

you didn't need to ask me

but I appreciate that you did. You are in control, not me

CPlus

@JeffAtwood "This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the question. It should possibly be an edit, a comment, another question, or deleted altogether."

Starship

@JeffAtwood But what I was just trying to say is I wish you wouldn't promote stuff like that, honestly. Some of the stuff you are linking to is...worrying...

Think about Trump's comments on January 6th. The stuff you link to is much more of an incitement to violence than that (espically links from your links links). The call for "fighting like hell or there won't be a country anymore". Sound familiar? How about calling the election a coup and saying "its either musk or us".

Spevacus

I deleted the post since it seems to be specific to SO and no longer needed

Jeff Atwood

02:05

> The stuff you link to is much more of an incitement to violence than that (espically links from your links links)

from my "links links". What does this mean? You follow something I link to, then it links to something else, and..

CPlus

@JeffAtwood While you are here could you settle this? There is no consensus on what very low quality flags on questions were for. When you added them, what was the rationale?

Starship

@Spevacus Just wondering, what is considered an acceptable number of close votes on old questions per day? I know using all is apparently too much but what is an okay number

@JeffAtwood The thing your post linked to link to a bunch of really worrying far-left "calls to actioN"

Jeff Atwood

I can't get into everything now, but trust me, we're on the same team

we always have been

Starship

@JeffAtwood I believe we have the same endgoals maybe but have very different views of how we should reach them"

Spevacus

@Starship It's a little feels-based. If you're just going on a crusade to close All The Old Things... That's not really the best of use of everyone's time. If you have a specific tag or topic you're targeting, I'm much more sympathetic to your cause

Starship

02:09

@Spevacus Well I got suspended for targetting [disputed-review-audits]

Spevacus

We've got a lot of old stuff that's worth closing here on Meta, sure, but is it really worth doing if it's getting no attention?

Starship

And is [stack-overflow] considered too big a tag to target? Or [status-norepro]? Or [specific-question]?

@Spevacus I think so...ideally relates to 1 specific site would migrate it to that sites meta though

CPlus

Also why do we have [status-wontfix] when there is just [status-declined]?

Starship

Then it would be really useful

Spevacus

@Starship Something that helps is starting up a meta q&a so we can coordinate action on it. If the community thinks it's worth doing, you have my blessing. If the community says "Meh, not really worth prioritizing" then I'd prefer you just close what gets bumped.

Starship

02:10

@CPlus wontfix is for bugs

@Spevacus ok

So not at all unless there is a well recieved meta post...

CPlus

But many bugs are [status-declined], and that has effectively the same meaning.

Spevacus

We're a lil family here. It's nice for us to get on the same page once in awhile.

Jeremy

> We urge every attorney to join us and insist that our government, a government of the people, follow the law. – William R. Bay, president of the American Bar Association

Journeyman Geek

02:59

@Starship not all fighting involves violence

There’s organisation or simply reminding people there’s hope

@bobble are you content about a job well done? ;p

bobble

03:24

@JourneymanGeek not until all content is well tagged

bobble

03:34

@Spevacus here's something relevant for [specific-answer] meta.stackexchange.com/q/253236/1017231

I VTC'ed many of the old SO-specific questions under that tag, I think the ones left are debatable

Been considering posting an answer to the burnination question about the job being basically done without burnination needed

bobble

04:20

status-completed please meta.stackexchange.com/q/371159

Spevacus

status-statused

bobble

Do we want a new tag for the concept of anonymous voting? Multiple anonymous questions could use it, e.g. meta.stackexchange.com/q/133433 meta.stackexchange.com/q/176154 meta.stackexchange.com/q/85529 meta.stackexchange.com/q/292847 meta.stackexchange.com/q/98675

It would have to be named carefully to distinguish it from the "votes"/feedback that anonymous visitors can give (post-feedback)

also, that tag name is... questionable. its intention is clear, and on a glance I can't see questions where it's used wrong, but it's vague enough to be begging for bad use.

anonymous-post-feedback would be better

bobble

04:43

@bobble heh, here's a synonym request which looks relevant... but it's for SO! meta.stackexchange.com/q/154833/1017231

M.A.R.

@Spevacus d'awwww

Elements In Space

06:01

Had to go the shops to day, for nutrients.
When I saw my friend in one of the aisles… my blood ran cold.
Fortunately, they didn’t notice me.

got away safely!

Journeyman Geek

→ 114 messages moved to Chimney

Andreas condemns Israel