I'm considering looking for Jeff and asking his opinion since he usually has some pretty good advice and has experience handling drama like this
but like...idk. I'm really not sure how to move on from here.
I agree with @Grace that the policies she closed were bad and had no place whatsoever in that poll. At the same time, though, I don't think we can simply call all the users who voted for it ignorant since we let that option grow up with many upvotes before nuking it from orbit, which may have convinced users that we were accepting that option.
On the Stack Exchange homepage, hotness points are rounded appropriately, but in the super multi collider whatsit thingy, they're always rounded down.
In that example, the question has 151.966 hotness points
I've played Halo 1 PC for a while now. I enjoy playing in the CTF and Slayer using the internet.
But I've been getting frustrated about people using hacks to kill people easily, or using the hack that makes people shot the head easier. Even more frustrated when someone uses a hack that makes eve...
@badp You're right, but they didn't know that and we didn't make sure they would know that so they get screwed. Had we been honest with them up front there would have been no need. Then again there probably was no need for the poll in the first place
@badp I don't think everything was tl;dr. I think many just came to the conclusion based on the upvotes on that answer that after everything in the essays and threads was said and done, the removed policy was still an okay option for reasons they might have missed.
Wow... I was about to post a comment on my own answer correcting myself. I need to learn to look at who wrote the answer before I jump into "must account for inaccuracy" mode.
@tzenes Out of curiosity, if we ran a vote with just no game-rec and all game-rec and game-rec won, would you be as vocal against game-rec or would you accept it as a necessary evil?
If that much value was going to be placed on something that is little more than an opinion, I'd look else where to a place where value was placed on data and research
Boardgames have much less traffic than gaming. the question was viewed 232 times, but they hit the sames issues than us. also note than on the 387 question of the site, the is 48 tagged "recommendations" they not all fall under the same game rec cat that on gaming, but this is a big %r of their questions....
@Brant Brant it means something when you let your site have lolcat pictures on it. It says, this is a site where we don't take ourselves seriously. And that's fine, there can be tons of sites like that, but I want a site which does take itself seriously. I come to gaming.se for that site. If it isn't going to be that site then I'll fill that need elsewhere
I thought I was going to get to help edit some answers, but it looks like they're all going to be taken care of before I get a chance. =)
@Tzenes Seriously, you'd leave the site completely? Why not just ignore the tag? It would be a shame to lose your contributions in all other aspects just because some people want to vote on which games they like.
@bwarner If game recs are allowed, then reputation basically becomes meaningless. It doesn't have anything to do with how good your answers are or how much you're willing to do research, but instead becomes solely a measure of that one time you said "Portal is pretty cool" on a question which attracted people who also think "hm yeah, Portal was a pretty cool game, let's upvote".
I'm not sure about you but I don't like the idea of putting so much emphasis on so very little content, compared to the answers that will be so much more detailed and yet lack as many upvotes.
It's not really an issue you can just ignore and it's not just some people, either, it'd be a relatively large part of the community.
@badp A game-rec subreddit is a pretty sweet idea. I'm not involved in reddit at all, though (don't even have an account there) so I don't really know.
@bwarner I want a site that is a certain way, but it would be wrong of me to force you all to make a site that I want. Thus I have two options (ignoring spinning a site myself): 1) Try to find such a site or 2) try to vote for the site to be that way
If option 2 fails, I'm left with option 1
I don't want a site where voting for opinions has the same weight as real discussions of strategy and tactics
thats why I'm here and not on TL
It bares mentioning, I also don't want a site where people get screwed over because we don't agree with them
Hi guys! I'm referring to this flash game:
that you can find here.
There is a sort of competition in my class on who can do a better score. Rigth now I'm the first but they're getting closer. What I know that they don't know is that if you score a lot of time before kicking zombies' ass you get...
The reddit is gamerec (currently private - I need to go now and want to be around for the first few hours).
Posting guidelines.
Only game-recs, please, and answers thereof.
Moderation guidelines.
If you have 5k (?) rep here, you get to have mod there (get in touch.)
If a post isn't a game-re...
@Ivo that's true but I've already been doing that for the past week, these past two days have been studying up on past exams/midterms, which I need the website to do
Although judging by the comments from the people who committed to the proposal, there is certainly going to be hatred against non-atheists being subtly thrown about everywhere.
Well, maybe I'm being unfair saying that. I just didn't really like the way the commitment comments were shaping up.
First question I'm asking on meta when it goes public is "Can non-atheists ask and answer questions on this site?"
/r/atheism is much like that :( It's more intolerant than many religious groups. It's embarrassing to me as an atheist. (Sorry for the delayed response :P)
it's just that when I read "front of the queue" I was thinking that meant the last item added in, so I was confused as to why dequeue was telling me to remove the front of the queue since it should be removing what I thought was considered the "back of the queue"