Skip to main content
22 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 16, 2020 at 10:22 history edited CommunityBot
Commonmark migration
Oct 16, 2019 at 14:00 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 19 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 14:00 comment added KorvinStarmast @fectin OK, I can delete that. Thanks for catching that. Here is a great case where explaining a down vote helped to improve an answer by correcting an error. You win SE for today! :)
Oct 16, 2019 at 13:58 comment added fectin Generally reasonable. Downvoted because flagging bad answers as “not an answer” is poison.
Oct 16, 2019 at 13:56 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 130 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 13:51 comment added KorvinStarmast @KRyan You might want to capture some of that last comment in your answer. The last sentence points to what is probably the core issue.
Oct 16, 2019 at 13:45 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 172 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 13:34 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 172 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 13:31 comment added KRyan @Medix2 Let me put it this way: I have read GS/BS; I haven’t bothered to read anyone else’s musings on the subject. I write answers that I think are good; if people disagree, they can downvote, and if they comment, I might see the flaws they point out and fix them. Or I might disagree and not, and they can vote how they like. But if the flaw they point out is “it doesn’t follow this policy: link,” then I’m not clicking that link and I am flagging it as no longer useful (to wit: it never was). This isn’t a matter of policy, there isn’t and never should be a policy: just vote.
Oct 16, 2019 at 12:35 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 191 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 12:23 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 660 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 12:20 comment added KorvinStarmast @KRyan I have added links to hopefully clarify what was unclear. Please let me know if this is better. I reviewed your 2013 era GS/BS post, and I am trying to figure out a clever way to fold that into this answer somewhere.
Oct 16, 2019 at 12:17 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 660 characters in body
Oct 16, 2019 at 3:13 comment added Exempt-Medic @KRyan Apologies and perhaps I don't understand what you said, but if your belief is that citation expectations for Good Subjective Answers should be removed entirely, I would want to see an answer reflecting this stance
Oct 16, 2019 at 2:11 comment added KRyan Sorry, disagree with #1—we shouldn’t have guidelines because apparently, every time we write one, someone gets the idea that it’s the one true way to back something up and everything has to follow it to the letter. Hence the, what, four separate discussions on this for absolutely no good reason? We’d be better off deleting the one’s we’ve got, apparently. And I’m not 100% clear what #2 is suggesting.
Oct 15, 2019 at 23:13 history edited V2BlastStaffMod CC BY-SA 4.0
fixed spelling
Oct 15, 2019 at 21:28 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 127 characters in body
Oct 15, 2019 at 16:18 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 412 characters in body
Oct 15, 2019 at 15:56 comment added KorvinStarmast @NautArch I trust that we have plenty of smart foliks with some more suggestions, so I will wait in hope of seeing just that. fingers crossed
Oct 15, 2019 at 15:48 history edited KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0
added 166 characters in body
Oct 15, 2019 at 15:48 comment added NotArch While I like this, I'd like to see what the folks who don't agree with the GSBS historically think. Because this means they'll be getting requests for support. I'd honestly rather understand if there's a different way to back up that can be discussed so that it isn't as binary as it seems to me right now.
Oct 15, 2019 at 15:44 history answered KorvinStarmast CC BY-SA 4.0