That's more a problem with sys-ag, I think.

Except for alignment, the tags you've singled out have a history of debate and confusion over what they're for in the first place.

(Alignments gets a lot of arguments, but that's not about the use of the tag.)

@Baskakov_Dmitriy I'm not sure we have any tags like that anymore. Only recommendation questions had community-agreed requirements before they could be on topic, and recommendations are gone. I don't know that we'd use a “specific requirements” tag warning.

@Baskakov_Dmitriy one problem is that there are a zillion and two system tags on RPG.SE, how do you enumerate them all?

hey there @nitsua60

@Baskakov_Dmitriy I'm curious what the problem you're trying to solve is. Is moderation of questions in those tags not working? Is it taking an unsustainable amount of moderation to make the questions work? Is the confusion over such tags creating unacceptably-negative experiences for users? Something I'm not imagining? (I don't doubt that the answer might be 'yes,' I just don't know what you're seeing and reacting to.)

@Shalvenay hiya

@Shalvenay Yeah, that's a point. The tag warning feature is either on or off for one tag, and doesn't have a way to be conditional on other tags used.

@nitsua60 I thought, rules-as-written is common to be misunderstood by new members like me. :) Or alignment -- it even has a FAQ page on Meta. Of course, a new member is unlikely to read it.

@Baskakov_Dmitriy Before a policy or mechanical change is enacted, there needs to be evidence of an existing problem. The Stack doesn't do things in anticipation of problems which haven't happened yet. So you'd need to show examples of the misunderstandings you think are common.

I'm not saying they don't exist--just that we need to be able to see the problem in order to effectively talk about what solution will address it.

@Baskakov_Dmitriy Oh, don't get me wrong--rules-as-written confuses me, too. But my confusion doesn't, I think, rise to the level of SE devs having to code things for me. To me, that's what Meta and chats are for.

We've got a pretty decent thing going with just leaving a comment saying "I'm confused why you used [tag], can you please [edit] your question to make it clearer how [thing the tag represents] is part of the problem you're asking for help with?"

On the matter of the alignment FAQ, as it might be a better example of what I mean: currently users who know about the FAQ sometimes link it to users who seem to be confused about alignment. And maybe sometimes those users read the FAW. Does that system seem to not be working, or is it too much moderation effort to make it work? (I'm talking about community moderating here, not diamond moderation.)

(Or, in shorter form, what he said ^^ )

(BTW, hi @BESW)

[wave]

[Wave]

Yeah, it's a matter of saying "Here is a problem that we are having. The thing we are currently doing to address it is insufficient/inefficient for the needed effect because of the evidence I'm providing." And then we start talking about solutions.

afk a bit... the boy's first game of Axis & Allies, and all =)

Ooer.

There are a lot of minor hiccoughs in the site which don't impact the quality enough to be worth fussing about. There are other things which represent notable drains on site resources (mostly time and energy of citizens engaging with the problem) and/or noticeably drop the quality of site content--those need to get addressed.

Is it solvable programmatically without a nontrivial overhaul?

Also, hi.

Any overhaul on the program level is nontrivial, because it's something that has to be applied to the entire network.

I was under the impression that each stack was a fork. My bad.

There are a handful of extensions that can be activated on a per-site basis (like MathJax), but the underlying structure is common to all Stacks.

I've made CMS systems like that before. Maintenance is a minefield, because you stand to kill a bunch of sites instead of one.

When I did it, it was for mall sites, and chain managers could manage their stores across all malls. For instance, if you were the regional Starbucks manager, you could organize an event for all the stores you run.

VTC opinion-based.

good technically-morning.

Anyone around and/or active at this hour?

Ish.

Starting to think about what to make for dinner.

Fair enough. I was thinking about bed...

for a short while

Trying to gin up an answer to the recently bountied CoC/5e mashup question.

The more I read into it, the more it feels like a 3.5/5e spell mashup question.

@UrhoKarila How does CoC's spell system even faintly feel like 3.5e's?

Blind/Deafen, for example

The costs are entirely different, of course, but the spell text itself is staright out of D&D 3.5

Talking about the d20 CoC, I realise I should make clear

It's not about the spells themselves, though - it's about the spellcasting system.

Yeah, and the Sanity/Ability damage that goes along with it

I was originally planning to include a bit about the differences in the effects themselves

"Wow, CoC Blind/Deafen allows you to permanently disable the target! That's overpowered!"

but looking into it a bit more it's that the effects are written for 3.5. Getting into the differences there would be a whole other answer in and of itself, and not something I'm up for right now.

gah, it's now 3am and I'm approaching uselessness

Hatmas begins in 11 and a half hours!

hehe

Haaaats.

I'm not prepared for this! I forgot to grow a head!

I just can't wait to see what all the hats are

Haaaaaaaaaats.

Does KorvinStarmast come onto chat at all?

Occasionally.

:/ I wanted to apologise for the misunderstanding with my comment on one of his meta answers

@KorvinStarmast Sincere apologies for the misunderstanding with my comment on your meta answer. It was not intended in anyway as putting words in your mouth. They were genuine questions and clarifications about what you meant. In retrospect though, I can understand why you might have interpretted my comment in the way you did, for which I apologise

That will have pinged him, anyway.

@Miniman @LegendaryDude @KorvinStarmast just dropped a comment on a question you-all close-voted.

@nitsua60 Honestly, unclear was the wrong close vote. A question that requires an answer for every different Channel Divinity effect is vastly too broad.

Personally, I think the on hold for "unclear" isn't quite on-point: it may be unclear why OP's confused by this thing, but I don't find it unclear what the question is.

I'd interpret it as "Unclear why you need to ask."

(ie, what part of the reading are you having trouble with?)

@Miniman That could make sense. Although there's not that many options. Maybe I'll edit my answer to be "instant: blah, meh, yip. Til next turn: foo, kilroy, cindy-lou hoo. One minute: this, that, the other." &c.

@BESW To the extent that's the thinking, the linked meta would suggest (to me) a downvote, not a close-vote.

In any case, voting will out!

(I feel like I'm bordering on violation of electioneering laws, pinging close-voters!)

@Miniman It would be nice if there were a way to change one's reason. Sometimes I've found myself closing for one reason, then an edit's made, and the question's now close-worthy in a whole new way... but I can't change the vote =(

@nitsua60 Or, sometimes, you just make a mistake :(

As I recall, the general party line on that is the most important thing is to get the question closed; any weirdness about the close reason tends to be so specialised that it's best addressed through comments.

And, being a healthy community full of knowledgeable and considerate people, we even admit (and often rectify!) our mistakes! This truly is a strange corner ofthe interwebs =)

@nitsua60 the unclear close reason also mentions needing additional details, so unclear can also double as "please give us a bit more information". can go either way in scenarios like this.

@BESW Which makes sense, I think.

gotta run--ttfn

ttfn!

@Wibbs I now and again drop by chat, Wibbs, and I thank you for that. Over the years that whole "so" construction when someone rephrases what someone else has said has become a core vehice for two kinds of people ...

@Wibbs One kind are comedians who are twisting a meaning for humorous effect. Then there are the rest, particularly in the age of taking offense like breathing, is twisting words. So it's a pet peeve of mine, and I probably over reacted due to coming to the board with something on my mind.

Do you have a preferred phrase to use in its place when the intent is sincere? Rephrasing an idea back to the speaker to see if you understand it is a valuable dialogue tool.

@Wibbs So please accept my apology for reacting in attack mode rather than doing what I should do, which is either pointing that out, or asking what you meant, or clarifying what i meant. I sorta did that, but with a crappy attitude.

@BESW Try asking a question: do you mean this? or "I understand X, have I got that right" (I've been doing that for years since I often work with people who are frequently bad about expressing themselves clearly, or use words that they have no idea what they mean)

@BESW What I find rude is "here is what you said" when it isn't what the other party said. It's the beginning of a lie, to twist what someone said. I've see it in real life, and in political discourse, and in a couple of court rooms. The only place I think it belongs is in comedy.

I guess I'm partly confused because I don't see that construction anywhere in the relephant comments.

@BESW SSD did edit the comment in question slightly.

@BESW That might be due toSSD editing Wibbs comment, and me deleting my answer. By the way, TuggyNE had the better answer. I was trying to achieve "KISS" principle but he did a better job of it.

Ah, mod edits that ignore the time window.

@BESW Because people (myself included) sometimes don't do one last look before hitting "send" or "post" or "answer" due to a feeling of urgency in the back of their minds ... the world has become too frenetic

@BESW I find that this happens more often, not less, in terms of anyone putting out an email, text, post, whatever and then leaving open gaps in meaning and understanding.

@BESW The other bit is how we receive messages. we all have certain filters and assumptions built in, and may not decode what was coded quite right.

Either you misunderstood what I said, you're responding to something other than the statement you're directing to, or it's very late and my brain is already asleep, because I don't understand how what you're saying is related to what I said.

I'm just noting that my confusion about the comment was because I missed that it'd been edited again more than a day after it'd been made--a power only moderators have.

@BESW I am expanding on a thought about that construction, and why I think it is so bad, and why it is so easy to not "get" what someone writes in text communication. And thus the response "do I understand you correctly" is where I find the best communication to happen.

@BESW I understand, and I didn't feel that point was worthy of further comment as I understand how, after the SSD edit (which I think was ill advised) one would wonder what I was responding to.

On the subject of facilitating understanding, it's extremely confusing when you label messages as replies to a message they aren't actually replying to.

@Miniman If is faster to click on a given text and reply than type in the name, I suppose that isn't helpful. I can go back to just typing the @name in future.

@Miniman And for that matter, a perfect illustration of how easy it is in text based communications to trip over getting the message across.

If it's in the middle of an ongoing conversation, you don't need to ping the user with every message.

WHen there are multiple parties present, I prefer to identify to whom I am speaking. What I see on my screen isn't what you see on your screen.

Good night or good morning to you all, depending upon which hemisphere we are referring to, I must make myself presentable for the day. Best wishes.

hey there @nitsua60

@Shalvenay hiya

@nitsua60 how're things going?

@nitsua60 poking at a lab report :P for a project that's years(!) overdue. I'm intro'ing it with "Fast, Cheap, Good. Pick any two"

@Shalvenay When I was at GSFC the mandate came down from NASA HQ to post "better, faster, cheaper" posters and banners at all Centers. By the end of the day "choose two" had been graffitied on every one I saw.

@nitsua60 hahaha

@KorvinStarmast that's a metaphor that I think will stick with me the rest of my life. Thank you, friend =)

@KorvinStarmast @ + B + Tab might be quicker than typing out the whole name ;)

Haaaaaats! The count is low enough I can do the math in my head....

@Zachiel I did that and nothing happened.

@nitsua60 it's a very exciting time indeed

@KorvinStarmast @ then B then tab ought to autofill BESW's name

like for me, if I have @K entered (the autocomplete list will show up, with your name in there) then hit tab, it fills it out to @KorvinStarmast

for me, if I need to autofill a name, I often have to click on one of many

a bunch of names pop up and I click on the one I am actually talking to

You can also keep hitting tab to move through the list. Or keep typing the name until it's the only one left.

Hello! Which dice in used in the system I am playing? Please, no house rules, and only tell me if you have actually played it. I didn't read the book yet, but Google gives no results to my question. system-agnostic dnd-5e vampire-the-masquerade alignment shadowrun

I think, that's another candidate for Perfect Question reward.

@Baskakov_Dmitriy please assure me this doesn't actually exist on the site

He's riffing on this.

phew good

lol

I almost forgot about that

less than a minute for hats

the anticipation is real