The Factory Floor

Feeds

08:18

0

How plausible is a system of clans of pure-blood wizards? In this medieval world, I want to set up a clan system that builds up every kingdom. Every kingdoms will have at least 3-4 big clans/families, each is unique to the theme of the magic they use. For example, clan Warr'og specialize in bloo...

Vylix

@Secespitus I think this should've been asked before, but is there any question that asks for plausability of "mana" as currency?

Secespitus

@Vylix "Mana" as in "limited life-time supply" or as in "regenerates like Stamina"?

Vylix

@Secespitus regenerates like a stamina

Secespitus

@Vylix Not really I think. This seems to be the closest I can find right now.

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus that is the only question matching the words mana, currency and is:q - you can do better than that ;)

Secespitus

08:27

10

A: How can magic and the economy reliably stand together?

I think it really depends upon the extent of the magic, but I see a number of different possible scenarios here. Wizards can create anything from nothing, but there are a limited number of wizards. In this case, I suspect that governments or possibly an organization of the wizards themselves mi...

Wizards can create anything from nothing, but at great cost. Whatever this particular "cost" is--perhaps years off their life span, mental fatigue, growing insanity, what have you--it is higher than most wizards are willing to pay and effectively limits the amount of precious items that they will create.

@dot_Sp0T You know me too well ;)

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus there there, I knew you could do it^^

Secespitus

2

Q: Would a Currency Backed by joules work?

In my world I have a large group of people (like a city-state/states) that have their economy based on joules (as in energy). the setting on Mars, 50 years after society collapsed and the major planetary infrastructure ground to a halt. no major power stations, no industry or anything else left w...

dot_Sp0T

I always feel like I should get the chance to review edits on my own questions before they get accepted. Especially for users that have enough rep to insta accept their own edit

I just had to roll back an edit on a question of mine because it didn't add anything but terminology and didn't even bother to explain the reason for the edit :/

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T You can unilaterally accept or reject an edit from a user with less than 2k rep. Everyone else has the appropriate privilege to do this instantly, but you should be notified.

@dot_Sp0T Edit reasons are very important and I try to always write something, though it often amounts to "Fixed typos". For edits on my own posts I ignore it most of the time, thought I feel it would be good to write an edit summary there, too.

Vylix

08:46

@Secespitus thanks! I'll read them for now

Separatrix

10:40

@Secespitus It was an edit from a >20k user and as such can blunder through anything without slowing down

@dot_Sp0T I was wondering why BoB had shown up again, I quite enjoyed those questions

Secespitus

@Separatrix If there was a break the privileges would lose their meaning a bit. And a break could be a problem when new users don't react after posting something and nobody would have the chance to edit their posts. So yeah, sometimes high-reps make mistakes. But the rollback button normally suffices for these cases.

dot_Sp0T

@Separatrix my, thank-you. Sadly I don't think there will be any more on it. The answers I got helped me flesh out the parts I had issues with enough, and additional species will likely be variations of the BoB and e.g. lizards to get some in-between stages.

Btw could anyone ping me in about 2 hours (that would be 1300UTC)? I set an alarm on my mobilephone but I would be endlessly grateful

Future Historian

11:23

@dot_Sp0T? I just realised something.

dot_Sp0T

@FutureHistorian realising means understanding - so this is always a good thing :D

Future Historian

That air battle we simulated was actually supposed to be near the USS Little Rock, the USS Belknap, , the Groznyi, Provornyi and Plamennyi.

And the Provornyi is a SAM destroyer.

gulps

dot_Sp0T

iirc you simulated mostly with @DaaaahWhoosh - I only chirped in a few bad comments

Future Historian

Oh.

Well, tell him that we forgot to account for SAMs coming from the Provornyi, unless the USS Little Rock already sent her to the bottom.

dot_Sp0T

But I guess you'll either have to redo your battle or just pretend that the SAM destroyer had no ammo left

Secespitus

11:27

@FutureHistorian You can just ping him and wait for him to come online.

Future Historian

Or it got sunk.

@dot_Sp0T.

dot_Sp0T

@FutureHistorian you can ping @DaaaahWhoosh by writing something like @DaaaahWhoosh I ping thee!

You can do this with really anyone on the site. E.g. you could ping @Secespitus or @James - @James really likes getting pinged I hear

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T Not everyone. The person has to have been in the chat at some points. Only moderators get a super-ping to ping people who have never been in the chat before.

dot_Sp0T

Iirc you still get a notice in your notice bar thing?

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T And it's Allmighty @James, Steward of WB, Crusher of Dreams, Lord of The Factory Floor and diamond moderator of WorldBuilding, Snorter of Beverages, First of his name., Duhh

@dot_Sp0T Only if you have been in the chat before. Otherwise it won't work. Just like you can't ping anyone by writing a comment if he hasn't posted or done anything in the discussion.

dot_Sp0T

11:35

giggles that will never get old

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T Especially the Snorter of Beverages-part of great mighty @James

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus really? I can't just mention someone in a comment and they will get a notice? Is it with the chat that you need to be / have been in the specific chat or just in chat in general?

Future Historian

Fair enough.

And...........not here.

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T The specific chat I think, just like the comments. For comments you have to be the OP, have written a comment before under that post, or edited the post.

It's shown by the auto-complete. No auto-complete, no ping.

Future Historian

Another thing.

I mentioned to @SCPilot something on the matter of space fighters being more unmanned than manned.

dot_Sp0T

11:38

Btw where does your name stem from anyways?

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian Yeah, AI for the win

Future Historian

I was wondering something: if I have a setting with point defence lasers, along with short range ones, depleted uranium rounds for firing from railguns, and also suicide drones, what would the space fighter drones have in terms of equipment anyway?

As in: would they have mostly short-range lasers or would they be equipped with kinetic weapons, be that conventional cannons or railguns?

The suicide drones practically can be equipped with either kinetic rods, nuclear warheads or conventional warheads.

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian Like this?

@dot_Sp0T My name, or Future's?

Future Historian

What are my options for any hypothetical unmanned drones for space fighters?

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian AI to find enemy and dodge enemy fire. And then go with the highest amount of explosive stuff you can.

For everything else you have long-range missiles/lasers/whatever

Future Historian

11:42

Well, I meant as in: what kind of weapons can I add to those things?

Secespitus

32

Q: What kind of realistic ranged weapons would be effective in spaceship combat?

So my indomitable army of bunnies have developed space travel and built their first space ship for the exploration of the great universe. However they have a problem! After some consultation with the great god, google, they have come to the conclusion that laser and plasma weaponry are most like...

science-based weapons science-fiction

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus yours

Future Historian

I know my spacecraft combat (Children of a Dead Earth player here), but what I need is drones in particular (the space fighter kind, not the suicide kind).

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian Why are they not sufficient? If you find out why they are not sufficient you can find out what you need

Future Historian

I know space fighters in real life are not practical.

I am talking about "fighters" in the sense of unmanned drones.

Secespitus

11:45

@dot_Sp0T Secespita is latin for Opfermesser (sacrificial knife). -us is a male ending in latin, whereas -a would be female.

I've used that username for quite a few years now.

Future Historian

You know: an AI spacecraft with a few weapon systems attached to it and capable of intercepting suicide drones and attacking other fighter drones.

dot_Sp0T

Whenever I think about spacecombat I come to the conclusion that defensive weaponry on ships/stations would result in a handful of point-defense-lasers at the end of each axis and the rest being fast-firing low-yield kinetic weaponry to pepper the space around the ship/station with as many objects as possible

@Secespitus and it seems you were right, I pinged you on one of my earliest questions just to check what you said :D

Future Historian

So, I have a LOT of point defence lasers, railguns and drones.

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T I am always right ;)

Which question did you use to test this?

Future Historian

Drones for long-range. Kinetic weapons at mid-range (when the computers can get a firing solution at x distance), and lasers for short-range precision attacks and point defence.

dot_Sp0T

11:47

@Secespitus my LTA Gas question ;)

@FutureHistorian never heard of that game before you mentioned it. Is it any good? I enjoy the occasional party of Interplanetary

Future Historian

It is a realistic space combat simulator.

With a capital "R" on the realistic part.

So, yes.

It is a good game.

dot_Sp0T

Hmm gotta take a look then, the last space-combat game I played was/is Rebel Galaxy

Future Historian

Either way, what would be a realistic scenario for........say.........Earth and her loyalist colonies on the Moon, Venus and Mercury vs Mars, the Belt, the Galilean Moons (Europa, Ganymede and Callisto) and the Saturn Moon System (especially Titan)?

In terms of the result.

Assuming this is the late 24th Century.

Also with nuclear pulse fusion engines being the norm, along with antimatter-catalysed variants for the UN's military.

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian As someone from Earth I would say that Earth wins.

Future Historian

Explain.

Why would Earth be able to smash the renegade colonists?

Secespitus

11:53

@FutureHistorian We have humans.

Future Historian

I am serious.

I want to be objective about this situation.

Secespitus

Maybe we kept the brightest humans and outsourced everything else?

dot_Sp0T

(I just fell off my chair)

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian What is the situation? How many people? What weaponry? What is the objective? Who knows what about the situation?

Future Historian

Well, here we go..........

Secespitus

11:54

@dot_Sp0T Hope you are alright ;)

Future Historian

So, this conflict has a series of various factors that influenced the outbreak of war.

1. Cultural divide between Earth and various colonies, thanks to advances in genetic engineering.

2. Failed negotiations between Earth and autonomists.

3. Growing secessionist sentiment in light of human rights violations by the UN's military.

4. Earth trying to directly control the supply of phosphorus, which is necessary for fertiliser and life support systems on human colonies (mainly to keep people on Earth from starving, since Earth had run into peak phosphorus).

Secespitus

@FutureHistorian Great, we can send people into war and mitigate our supply problems a bit.

Future Historian

And these are the numbers for Earth's military forces: 12.9 billion at the time * 3%, then Mars' 710 million at the time * 3%, then we have the Belters having an estimated 10 to 20 million colonists * 3%, then the Galilean Moons have a combined 40 million people * 3% and the Saturn Moon System has a combined 20 to 25 million people * 3%.

Secespitus

Seems like Earth is desperate. With everything else being equal I'd say Earth would fight harder and would, at least from a story perspective, have more reasons to win / to try every available strategy to win

Future Historian

The 3% is for the potential recruit count.

This is NOT the same as full active service.

Secespitus

12:00

Earth therfore has massively more troops available then everyone else and Earth's troops are desperate to fight so that their families can survive.

Future Historian

And also ignores the amount of insurgents on the colonist side of things.

Sorry.

Forgot to account for the insurgents.

So, remember: these numbers are ALL based on the conventional troop count, not counting any insurgents.

So, who wins in the end?

dot_Sp0T

From what I read: Earth has more potential troops, earth has a monopoly on a resource that is necessary to survive in space. Earth could simply turtle throughout a conflict - they are more or less self-sufficient and the attackers eventually run out of sulfur. Hence earth wins.

Future Historian

Does Earth succeed or will the insurgency break Earth's morale?

Actually, that fourth factor is exactly what triggered the conflict.

The colonists, out of fear, decided to break away officially, though at this point, the conflict was already an undeclared war for decades.

dot_Sp0T

sorry phosphorous, not sulfur

Future Historian

Also, Mars has been terraformed to a certain extent, though not completely.

And Mars, Deimos and C-type asteroids is where most of the concentrated phosphorus is located these days.

Earth already reached peak phosphorus at this point.

Secespitus

12:04

@FutureHistorian I don't think there would be enough people to completely overthrow Earth's Elite if there is a common enemy in outer space competing for necessary resources

dot_Sp0T

If earth has a resource monopoly it will eventually win; if Earth does not have a monopoly it will lose

Future Historian

So it depends on who controls the flow of phosphorus.

dot_Sp0T

The phosphorus must flow

Future Historian

Unless the colonists decide to drop an asteroid on Earth, then yes.

Earth is probably going to win.

Is it not?

dot_Sp0T

If there's no incentive to prevent damage to earth then the other party can simply divert asteroids and bombard earth until they give up

Secespitus

12:06

There was a proverb for this "The novice discusses tactics - the genious discusses logistics" or something like that

Future Historian

Honestly, the only reason the colonists never dropped an asteroid on Earth the first time around is for PR reasons.

They want to look good.

But they had to in Round II.

They got desperate enough to drop an asteroid on Earth after a pitched fight with the Orbital Guard and whatever military forces Earth had available on the Earth-Moon System.

On the bright side, at least I get an idea of who would win, unless they drop an asteroid on Earth.

Correct?

:D

dot_Sp0T

They want to look good - for whom? For the earthlings? As far as the earth government propaganda machine goes the colonists are considered parasites. Taking their fortunes to leave a planet full of poverty to seek out adventure and riches - and now that they've exploited the rest of the solar system, that greedy bunch comes back to take the little that earth's inhabitants have left!!!

Future Historian

No, not for the Terrans.

Or Gaians in this case.

It is for the loyalist colonists.

Those that refused to be independent.

Some Martian settlements were actually loyal to Earth and for a while, Callisto was as well.

So, you need a good PR department.

And a good PR department = a lot more people willing to aid your cause.

So, @dot_Sp0T? Sound good as a way to convince other colonists to join your cause?

dot_Sp0T

How many people are we speaking? What advantages are we speaking? If there's nothing significant to be gained from the goodwill of hardcase loyalists (which probably won't like you anyways if you're attacking their overlord) there's no point in gaining their goodwill

Future Historian

Or not really?

In terms of loyalists?

dot_Sp0T

12:13

From my understanding of the human psychology and logistics a war is not won by number of troups but by the influence of your propaganda machine

Future Historian

Well, you have the Moon, Venus, Mercury, parts of Mars and Callisto early on.

And Callisto switches sides following some internal strife, though the Martians do happen to have some internal issues as well.

dot_Sp0T

So you have near limitless resources and zero-gravity manufacturing facilities pitted against an old mostly exploited planet and some colonies on other planets?

Future Historian

Well, to an extent,vyes.

The problem is.............

The Martians, the Galilean Moons and many of the Belters as settlements HATE each other.

Or at least sometimes dislike each other.

So even if the war against Earth ended, they still have each other to worry about.

Assuming they gained sovereignty.

So, who wins overall?

Earth because monopoly and/or colonists disliking each other, or colonists because better industry, and the like?

dot_Sp0T

Either whoever you need to win in order to make your story progress into the direction you want it to progress, or the independent weapons manufacturers who profit from all the fighting

War knows only losers

Future Historian

Ignoring story and going for a realistic scenario, who wins?

Well "wins", quote, unquote.

Wait, wait, wait.

@dot_Sp0T?

Assuming unofficial hostilities since 2373 and assuming official hostilities begin in 2392, when can I expect this first war to end?

This is, of course, assuming real physics, with Hohmann transfers being considered, along with launch windows, and the like.

So, hostilities technically begin in 2373, but not made official until 2392.

When can we say that either Earth restores order (for a while) or the colonists secure some form of independence?

dot_Sp0T

12:22

@FutureHistorian I really cannot give you a simple a or b answer on this question. For once there's thousands of facts that influence a conflict on such a big scale, then there's the issue of technology, and so forth. most important there's the issue of time and willingness of me digging into your world and data and doign calculations,etc. - I gladly provide you with my thinking and mention things that I think could be important. But I do not have the time to make decisions for you

especially as I do not like taking decisions when I think/know that I do not have enough data/considered everything

Future Historian

Oh.............

dot_Sp0T

sorry

Future Historian

Well, nuclear fusion technology for spacecraft propulsion is a thing.

Particularly nuclear pulse fusion and antimatter-catalysed variants.

Secespitus

There is a great trick I found for situations where you are uncertain @FutureHistorian: Assign a winning side to heads of a coin and toss the coin. See what comes up. If you feel like the answer is good then keep it. If you didn't like the result of the coin toss you know which direction to explore.

Trust you gut instincts and go with what feels right for you.

Future Historian

The average spacecraft during planetary transfers has a Delta-V estimate of anywhere from 150 - 200 km/s.

dot_Sp0T

12:26

E.g. for a mere clash of two fleets one consideration is how long it takes them to meet each other, then weaponry, etc. - if it already takes 5+ years only to mobilize the various earth fleets into a strikeforce to hit a single target, and it then takes anoter 20 years to reach that target it will at least take 25+ years before the war is over

Future Historian

Well, @dot_Sp0T. VISTA can deliver 100 tonnes to Mars from Earth in T-6 months.

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T Only if nothing political happens in between.

Humans are the most important random factor in a war.

Future Historian

This serves as the basis for the nuclear pulse fusion spacecraft in the setting, and their antimatter-catalysed variants.

So, given that, how long before getting to the Outer Solar System, specifically Jupiter and Saturn?

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus assuming travel-speeds faster than comm-speeds politics won't influence the fleet. Recommended reading: The Forever War - Haldemann, Joe

Future Historian

I already did. @dot_Sp0T.

Interesting novel, to be clear.

dot_Sp0T

12:29

@FutureHistorian I have no idea. I only just started reading & learning about vectors and matrices

Future Historian

Oh....

Well, this thing can travel from Earth to Mars in 6 months with just 100 tonnes of payload.

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T That is only if you think of politics between different planets/sides of the war. There could still be conflict on one planet delaying the preparation for example because one faction doesn't want to start a war, or with different equipment, ...

dot_Sp0T

A quick over the thumb calculation would take the average acceleration you can achieve in outer space and then divide that by half the distance you want to travel to get half the traveltime (as you will accelerate for half the distance and decelerate for the other half to get there as fast as possible)

Future Historian

projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/…

Take a look at this.

@dot_Sp0T. This is reliant mainly on Hohmann Transfers, not the Brachistochrone ones unless you are in the gas giant moons.

dot_Sp0T

Another issue for me is that I understand about a third of the terms you use - and even these only superficially. So I don't think of me as qualified to do anything than trying to provide inside of possible human factors

Future Historian

12:36

Oh.

projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/…

So, you might want to take a look at that.

Blue is transfer time using chemical rockets.

Red is launch window timeframe.

2 years for a Mars launch window, one year for both Jupiter and Saturn.

Travel time to Mars is 6 months for VISTA, one year to Jupiter with the same spacecraft and 5 years to Saturn using the same spacecraft.

dot_Sp0T

my ksp experience tells me that launch windows only are important if you need to conserve engery

Future Historian

And you still need to conserve energy for Deuterium-Tritium fusion spacecraft.

Thankfully for me...........

I have Helium-3-Deuterium fusion spacecraft.

And also antimatter-catalysed versions.

Unfortunately, these are still not very efficient for interstellar travel or quick interplanetary travel (yet).

So, @dot_Sp0T?

Are those estimates good for travel time?

And the numbers I mentioned earlier were the optimal launch windows.

dot_Sp0T

12:59

I'm sorry I gotta leave the chat for now - got some appointments to make.

Future Historian

Oh, fair enough.

@Secespitus? You think that the travel times are reasonable?

You know: for the spacecraft to get to x or y points from Earth?

Secespitus

13:20

@FutureHistorian I have no idea.

Future Historian

Well, this is just a guess for most of the estimates, except the Mars travel time.

Launch windows are all actual launch windows.

Worldbuilding Meta

13:42

1

Q: Anyone else finding they get... almost writers block... from too much Stack Exchange?

I've been here a while now but I'm finding that the more I contribute to this exchange in a given week the less I feel like writing anything elsewhere in my life, does anyone else find that they experience writers block on other projects this way? Edit: For the record I'm having a blast with the...

discussion

2

Q: Do people primarily use this site for builds or checks?

My primary use of the Exchange, when it comes to asking questions, has been to back check answers I've already tackled in my writing, is that typical or most people come here for raw advice to start building and writing particular projects?

discussion

DaaaahWhoosh

14:00

I've come to the conclusion that no one actually knows what the reality-check and science-based tags are for

2

sphennings

@DaaaahWhoosh Which is why they should burninated.

Secespitus

@DaaaahWhoosh Which is why I stand by my post to the discussion to burninate both

DaaaahWhoosh

ugh, yeah, I guess that's really the only good option

I used to think science-based would help, but now I'm not so sure

sphennings

Science based should suffer the same fate.

DaaaahWhoosh

the way I saw it, science-based meant you wanted a scientific answer, not having the tag meant you weren't too concerned about science but wanted something that was logically consistent. Essentially what most people seem to say reality-check is for

sphennings

14:05

it's a fair assumption to assume that a world will function like our own unless otherwise stated. Science based basically means don't say "Just use magic" which we already don't agree with.

Logically consistent (with your premise) should be the default assumption.

DaaaahWhoosh

yeah, I can't seem to argue with that. Burning them both seems like a good idea

I guess we just need to convince everyone who disagrees. Probably by showing them how no one agrees with their definitions of what the tags are for

sphennings

If I was being ideologically pure about things I'd say we should delete the hard-science tag as well.

There's a lot less confusion about the usage of that tag though. I also quite like the type of answers the tag leads to.

It's role could be done in the body of the question text.

DaaaahWhoosh

I like the hard-science tag because it gives you a good, solid reason to downvote/flag non-hard-science answers

dot_Sp0T

@sphennings sorry but no. Any wargument stating that a tag or whatever else could be replaced by adding something to the body of a question is idiotic.

Secespitus

@sphennings There is confusion from time to time. Users who use the tag and don't know about the constrains and such. I listed some discussions in my answer about burninating science-based and reality-check. But I feel like it's okay for such an edge-case. But reality-check and science-based just feel like defaults that take up unnecessary tag slots

sphennings

14:21

@dot_Sp0T The inverse is also true. Tags should not be a replacement for the question body.

dot_Sp0T

If people dont want to read parts of your question they will not, and will still feel entitled to complain to you about not making your intents clear

indeed. but the hard-science tag is more like a categorization. Such as mkst tags on here. Needed to communicate data about the question that can be ambiguous otherwise.

DaaaahWhoosh

@dot_Sp0T do you at least agree that reality-check is useless/confusing, and science-based probably is too?

dot_Sp0T

misinterpreting tags is much harder than misinterpreting something somebody wrote once in their question. Especially because you can look up other questions using the same tag to get an idea

@DaaaahWhoosh that fully depends on your stance on the suvject. what do you say?

DaaaahWhoosh

@dot_Sp0T I say reality-check is useless/confusing, and science-based probably is too

sphennings

@dot_Sp0T I was on this site for over 6 months before I noticed that there were tags. I still don't pay attention to them.

dot_Sp0T

14:27

@sphennings thus you are part of the isdue

@DaaaahWhoosh agree on reality-check. But i find science-based useful as it communicates what the op is looking for from an answer

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T The confusion about the tags is a good counter-argument to your statement that it's harder to misinterpret them than the question body

sphennings

@dot_Sp0T You don't engineer a system for the ideal user you engineer a system for the users that you have.

dot_Sp0T

i guess we could add one or more additional tags to communicate other desired directions, such as economy-based or society-based

DaaaahWhoosh

@dot_Sp0T we probably already have economy and society

sphennings

@DaaaahWhoosh If people are ignoring tags. How does adding more tags help.

DaaaahWhoosh

14:30

lol I made the tag buttons so I could check if the tags exist, they do

sphennings

@DaaaahWhoosh Do they?

DaaaahWhoosh

@sphennings lol yes, they do. Hundreds of questions for each

I never really saw the science-based tag to be a science tag, that is, I thought the answers would use science, not be about science

lol we also already have a science tag

sphennings

@DaaaahWhoosh That might be a better solution than burninating the tag actually. Make x-based a synonym for x

DaaaahWhoosh

yeah, but like I'm saying I don't think it's equivalent

Secespitus

@sphennings Nope, science has a different focus. Science perceived in a different world

@sphennings See the comment discussion here

sphennings

14:37

@Secespitus Fair point.

dot_Sp0T

14:52

@DaaaahWhoosh that is what I mean. economy-based and society-based would communicate that reasoning in an answer should consider one of these things as science-based communicates that reasoning should be done in a scientific matter. An economy based reasoning would take monetary more concern about monetary things, and base reasoning on prices and availability of resources/work. A society based reasoning would take people and, well, society into concern, basing reasoning on human

and/or group behaviours/mentalities.

Does that help?

DaaaahWhoosh

yeah, but I mean, aren't economics/anthropology sub-branches of science?

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh With that reasoning you could argue against every single tag; I think there was a meta arguing for removing plenty tags based on that

DaaaahWhoosh

right. I see your argument, and agree with it. But I don't think the problem with 'science-based' is that it's not specific enough

Secespitus

-2

A: Is "science-based" a meta- or otherwise-problematic tag?

Let's split it. chemistry This one already exists. nuclear Same here. newtonian-mechanics electromagnetics astrophysics This one could probably be confusing; maybe celestial-mechanics quantum-mechanics Promote those as necessary.

Others have thought about splitting, too.

DaaaahWhoosh

so, a question about a world's economy that requires answers using economics would be tagged both with economics and economy-based

one for what the question is about, one for what the answers should look like

I guess it gets rid of the meta-tag issue, but it seems worse

primarily, it's hard to tell the difference between the two tags

Secespitus

14:59

Meta tags that dictate what answers should look like leave less space to define the topic of the question as there are only 5 tags available per question.

DaaaahWhoosh

@Secespitus agreed, which is why I think hard-science is the only one of the three that is useful enough to keep around

Secespitus

And it's confusing users because some tags work different than others, though they look the same. If it could be done like with the four base tags on Meta it might work, but not with the current system.

@DaaaahWhoosh For now this is my line of thinking, too.

dot_Sp0T

The biggest issue is understanding and reading up on things you don't understand. To answer a question people should first read the whole question and check the list of things it is tagged with. Then read up on the tags they've never encountered. - Here we have our issue: Many people don't even read beyond the first paragraph, if at all.

@Secespitus oh yeah, if we could get different colours for tags that describe what a question is looking for in an answer we could probably standardize that process sufficiently

it would also instantly draw attention

sphennings

@dot_Sp0T This is why I always suggest editing for clarity and brevity in the sandbox.

DaaaahWhoosh

I think we just need to be better at downvoting answers. People are free to give bad answers, we just need to tell them when they have.

dot_Sp0T

15:05

We need to be willing to actually delete answers no matter how many upvotes they get

DaaaahWhoosh

oh yeah, that too

Secespitus

@sphennings I second that

dot_Sp0T

especially if the thinking described in one answer spawns a host of 'me too' answers that go into the same direction

DaaaahWhoosh

deleting answers is more of a mod thing, though, and could be a slippery slope

people freak out enough when mods close questions, it'd be worse if they start deleting highly-voted answers

Secespitus

That's more of a community thing but it's hard enough to make people downvote not-hard-science answers on questions with the hard-science tag even when there is a post notice.

DaaaahWhoosh

15:09

yeah, but at least the downvote thing is something we as a community can start doing

sphennings

You need 20k rep to vote to delete answers and they only enter the queue if there is a negative vote count.

dot_Sp0T

If people like the way something is written they will upvote it. Even if it shoots past the goal.

Flagging these answers is always a hard thing for users as those flags can be rebuffed due to the same reason an answers was initially upvoted.

It would be great if the OP of a question would get a more serious flag or similar to mark answers they find do not address the actual questions - especially to communicated language barrier issues

DaaaahWhoosh

we can always comment on the answers, downvotes can be buried but with comments it's much harder to hide

dot_Sp0T

which is in my opinion the biggest problem - people speak different languages, and many here are second-language-speakers of English. They might use words differently but by no means wrong

DaaaahWhoosh

eh, I think the language barrier is a separate issue

if someone isn't making themselves clear, the question should be put on hold so that no one prematurely answers it

Secespitus

15:17

6

Q: Proposal: ALL questions start "on hold" for 1 hour

I do not know if there is a way to adjust the SE software to accommodate this request, but this idea has come up REPEATEDLY in multiple meta discussions, so I'm formally proposing it. ALL new questions start out "on hold" for 1 hour WorldBuilding SE exists on the edge of topics that work for th...

feature-request close-reasons

7

Q: Add feature to automatically add a notice to new questions

I added an answer to the question Can there be done more to assure users that closing questions is not a Bad Thing? and wanted to raise this as a new Meta-Post to discuss as Tim B and dot_sp0t suggested. I had the idea for this answer because I am trying my best to help new users understand why q...

discussion closing-questions

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh What if they make themselves as clear as they can? There's scores of words that have scores of meanings. Each meaning as valid as the next.

DaaaahWhoosh

if there is any ambiguity, people should use comments to ask for clarification

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh What if it is not ambiguous to the person answering the question?

Nex Terren

Steamlink for $15 for anyone who might be interested: amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B016XBGWAQ/…

dot_Sp0T

@NexTerren Temporarily out of stock. Order now and we'll deliver when available. We'll e-mail you with an estimated delivery date as soon as we have more information. Your credit card will not be charged until we ship the item.

Nex Terren

15:22

@dot_Sp0T Right, but it's still $15.

dot_Sp0T

@NexTerren as well as amazon prime and probably only available in the continental US

Nex Terren

You just have to wait for it to get in stock to be shipped.

@dot_Sp0T That's possible. Honestly I didn't check the other sites. Feel free to do so if you're interested.

DaaaahWhoosh

@dot_Sp0T if an answerer answers the wrong question, then the OP can comment on their answer and edit the question. At which point the answer can be edited or deleted.

dot_Sp0T

Hmm apparently ships worldwide, just ordered one to see if it would stop me ordering

Cool, let's see if it has more steam than a pie

@DaaaahWhoosh Let's say the questions uses wording a, it gets an answer to this wording which makes the OP realize that they should write the question differently, they do and notify the answer. Then they get rebuffed that they changed the very question and what-not - this is very very unnerving.

@NexTerren do you already have one?

DaaaahWhoosh

@dot_Sp0T yeah, I mean it sucks, but what's the alternative? Ask a new question?

Nex Terren

15:26

@dot_Sp0T Nope. Been holding off, but $15 is low enough to make me buy.

Secespitus

@DaaaahWhoosh Exactly. If it changes so much that answers are invalidated it should not be closed as a duplicate

Nex Terren

@DaaaahWhoosh Have you played around with character creation?

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh sometimes it's the best thing to do. But then again imagine you have to delete a question with 50+ upvotes and multiple answers with just as many votes on them that are all addressing the thing that took you half of the question body to clarify you're not looking for :/

DaaaahWhoosh

@NexTerren for the Star Wars game? Yeah, I've done some work on it, should be nearly done

Nex Terren

@DaaaahWhoosh Sweet. Have any questions?

DaaaahWhoosh

15:27

@dot_Sp0T I agree it's a problem. I just don't know where you're going with it

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh I'm just complaining about my dragon question. I do this once every year. And you're foolish enough to listen to my wailing

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T Cooking/Butchering?

Nex Terren

@dot_Sp0T It really feels like you're just dragon-g this problem out. :(

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus yeah, the difference in wording where I thought that cooking would hint to a more clinical approach of preparing the meat while butchering was more brutal and primitive

DaaaahWhoosh

@NexTerren I probably want to discuss starting equipment with you, and I wasn't sure about stress boxes. But nothing major seemed to come up

dot_Sp0T

15:30

@NexTerren oh em gee! Are we allowed to make terrible puns again? :D

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T I've read some discussions at some point about that on Meta. Though I didn't pay too much attention to it. I loved the question anyway. It was one of the first I ever read on the site.

@dot_Sp0T Was that ever forbidden?

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus I think we overdid it at some point in the pasta

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T Okay, I see why it was forbidden :D

dot_Sp0T

iirc @DaaaahWhoosh is a genius when it comes to word-buns

Worldbuilding Meta

0

Q: Can't use the @namehere, function on some comments

I don't know if this is a Bug or an inbuilt function but I get occasional issues with comments where I can't use the @namehere format to notify a commentator on a particular question. I can't see a pattern to this, are there built-in exceptions to using the function or is the site bugging on me?

bug

DaaaahWhoosh

15:35

I am by no means the master of puns here

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T I thought @TrEs-2b was the master of puns

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh ah c'mon you're basically a pun-zer

DaaaahWhoosh

I like to think of myself more as a dachspund

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus see!

Nex Terren

@DaaaahWhoosh Good to hear! Think you'll want to game tonight?

@dot_Sp0T Were we ever not allowed to?! I'd rebel from such tyranny.

DaaaahWhoosh

15:41

@NexTerren it really depends on how my allergies are. I've been feeling half-dead for the past two days

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh you can do it!

Nex Terren

@DaaaahWhoosh Ewww. I'm so glad that I (basically) don't have to suffer from that.

@DaaaahWhoosh Also sorry that you have to deal.

I was counting up confirms.

DaaaahWhoosh

I should be nearing the end of this season's allergies, I think I only get it for a couple of days in spring and fall. Just not sure if it'll resolve itself today or not

dot_Sp0T

You could use a computer vocalizer

DaaaahWhoosh

it's not so much the voice I'd be worried about, more of how distracted and/or a dick I would end up being

Bellerophon

15:49

@DaaaahWhoosh But you're always distracting people.

dot_Sp0T

@DaaaahWhoosh you could play a droid - droid's are expected to be phallic in character

sphennings

@DaaaahWhoosh Pro tip: don't be a dick to the GM. It ends badly.

dot_Sp0T

GM is just another name for mods

Bellerophon

Damn mods.

Down with mods. Join the rebellion today.

sphennings

@dot_Sp0T Don't be a dick to the mods either. Especially the new ones. They're itching to use their new powers.

Secespitus

15:55

@sphennings "Stones fall - everyone dies."

Mithrandir24601

@sphennings <whisper> Especially the snorter of beverages. I dare not use his name in case he spots me <\whisper> <.< >.> <.<

dot_Sp0T

@Mithrandir24601 do you mean He who is first of his name?

HDE 226868

Ah, yes, the herald of Glarnak.

Mithrandir24601

NO! Don't star it!!! He'll spot me! Hides

Bellerophon

What? James?

Mithrandir24601

15:56

shhhhh!!!

Secespitus

@Mithrandir24601 You're doomed! Run!

Mithrandir24601

When's the next rocket launch?

dot_Sp0T

@HDE226868 joke's on you, you've got a diamond too.

Serban Tanasa

...And so I remain a mortal, diamond-less

dot_Sp0T

I wonder what happens if mods try to ban each other - do they create a power discharge over the chat?

Serban Tanasa

15:58

I will diminish, and go into the West and remain SerbanTanasa

HDE 226868

It creates a crack in space and time, and the TARDIS falls through. The Doctor doesn't like it.

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T It opens a gate to the Astral plane

DaaaahWhoosh

@SerbanTanasa you have passed the test!

Serban Tanasa

:D

Transcript for