The Nineteenth Byte

Anonymous

11:15 PM

@El'endiaStarman @AlexA. I like the looser definition of "unfair advantage". But I know that a lot of people on this site won't be happy with a subjective definition (one springs to mind quite easily).

Alex A.

@Mego lel who springs to mind?

El'endia Starman

@Mego ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You can't make everyone happy.

Anonymous

@AlexA. Peter

Cᴏɴᴏʀ O'Bʀɪᴇɴ

@Mego Mr. Taylor?

ninja'd

quartata

@AlexA. The downvote on the question (lmao) or the downvote on GamrCorp's answer?

Alex A.

11:17 PM

@Mego If he has a good idea for an objective definition then I encourage him to post it.

@quartata Hm?

Oh!

GamrCorps posted an answer and deleted it so quickly that I didn't even see it

I meant the question

quartata

yeah I have no idea why someone would downvote the question.

Alex A.

I don't really care. It's meta anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

quartata

I kinda feel guilty because I am the downvote on GamrCorp's answer and I didn't want him to delete it

Alex A.

I can mod undelete it. "LIVE WITH YOUR SHAME."

quartata

It's a fine answer but I personally disagree with it for a couple reasons

feersum

11:21 PM

I downvoted the question.

Alex A.

Why?

Cᴏɴᴏʀ O'Bʀɪᴇɴ

Boom goes the dynamite.

feersum

I felt like it.

quartata

? why

Alex A.

Um, alright.

Anonymous

11:22 PM

Downvoting a discussion question on meta is essentially saying "this is not worth discussing"

feersum

^

quartata

@feersum lmao

Alex A.

@feersum Why isn't it worth discussing? Folks in chat were discussing it earlier and came to the conclusion that it really isn't clear what's covered by that loophole.

quartata

It is worth discussing we must objectify all the thihings !!!1!!1

Anonymous

Thing is, "unfair" is inherently subjective. I'm not sure how well a rule like this would work on a site that's built around empirical and clear-cut rules. This isn't a problem for, say, question closure, but since there's no "vote for whether this answer is valid or not," a non-objective rule for answer validity is dubious at best. — Doorknob ♦ 2 hours ago

Anonymous

11:23 PM

Hey look another person not satisfied by a subjective rule

feersum

@AlexA. Never mind, the only reason is that I felt like it. You can't argue with that.

El'endia Starman

I actually don't see- I should post this as a reply to Doorknob.

Alex A.

@feersum hahaha alright

Anonymous

@feersum I can't argue with it, but it does lose you a lot of respect for the "fortehlulz" downvote

Anonymous

On another note, this is on HNQ:

Anonymous

11:25 PM

14

Q: Better way to say "No bullshit"

I'm the person who like concise, and don't like the literature style stuffing in lots of irrelevant information to distract you from the main idea. So when I saw a book called "No bullshit Java", I know that's exactly the kind of writing style I prefer, both reading and writing. However, that "...

phrase-request

Alex A.

Haha got another question downvote.

El'endia Starman

@Doorknob: I actually see this as being less about the validity of an answer and more about it's..."quality". Hence why I suggested downvotes as the solution to unfair tactics, not flagging or deletion. I see this as less of a right vs. wrong (or rather, valid vs. invalid) and more of a okay vs. not okay issue. — El'endia Starman 6 secs ago

Alex A.

Is it honestly not worth discussing?

El'endia Starman

@AlexA. +7/-2. I'd say enough people think it is.

quartata

It is it's just that some people's eyes glaze over when they hear someone trying to define "unfair"

Alex A.

11:26 PM

It just seems odd to me.

feersum

The only answer is along the lines of "It's pointless to try to classify this"

Which is my feeling from the start.

quartata

If we're going to delete answers that violate that loophole then yes we need to classify it.

Alex A.

I don't think El'endia's point is that it's pointless to classify unfairness, but rather that it's subjective and we should use good judgement in determining what to do with such situations.

El'endia Starman

@quartata I specifically don't suggest deletion.

(At least, not right away.)

Maybe I should make that explicit.

Alex A.

I thought that was explicit

quartata

11:30 PM

@Adnan Are there any docs for 05AB1E?

El'endia Starman

I'll make it even more explicit!

Alex A.

Haha okay

Anonymous

@quartata We only delete invalid answers (relevant meta post). This is a discussion about whether or not certain answers would be non-competitive.

Alex A.

@Mego In most cases, answers which violate loopholes are considered invalid.

quartata

@Mego answers violating standard loopholes are invalid not non competiti e

Cᴏɴᴏʀ O'Bʀɪᴇɴ

11:32 PM

I am making a semi-useful language that is readable. Any ideas as to its name?

Dennis

@El'endiaStarman Your usage of the word posted made me wonder if we're talking about the same thing. The meta thread is about modifications to an interpreter after the challenge had been sandboxed. Once it has been posted to main, even bug fixes would make an answer that benefits from them non-competing.

quartata

ninja'd stupid wifi

Doorknob

@El'endiaStarman that's going into "get rid of the accepted answer checkmark" territory

Alex A.

I was one of the people who downvoted the suggestion to remove the accept answer feature.

Anonymous

@AlexA. Hmm... I think, then, the issue is in the loophole definition. I don't see a reason why they should be deleted.

Alex A.

11:33 PM

Well, the way to avoid the loophole is to mark your answer noncompeting.

quartata

Ooh link? I definitely don't think accepted answers should go away.

Anonymous

Except for part 2 of Dennis's answer on the meta post I linked

Anonymous

Answers that produce correct results, but break a rule of the challenge, ignore parts of the spec or violate a loophole.

For example, answers that make use of banned built-ins fall into this category.

Marking an answer as non-competing does not exempt it from being invalid. The only exception to this rule is using a programming language (or a feature thereof) that was implemented after the challenge was posted.

Anonymous

Oh wait that last sentence

feersum

I always downvote answers that add a 0 or 1-byte builtin to do a challenge, whether or not they follow any "rules".

Alex A.

11:34 PM

10

A: We're not a Q&A site. But what should be done about it?

Remove the Accept feature This feature is likely way too integral to how SE instances work for this to be possible without forking the software, but I don't think the concept of accepted answers is useful on PPCG. The most fundamental pillar of this community is that every single question needs...

Dennis

@feersum That's misplaced blame IMHO. I always try to ban one-step built-ins from my challenges.

Anonymous

In the latest policy post about this subject, it explicitly states that using a programming language or feature that didn't exist after the challenge doesn't make an answer invalid; it just needs to be marked non-competitive.

El'endia Starman

@Dennis Good point; I added this line:

> With regards to the Sandbox especially, very few people see a challenge in the Sandbox (comparatively). If someone's abusing this loophole, that'll be apparent.

feersum

@Dennis That isn't the same.

This is different from e.g. a Mathematica builtin.

El'endia Starman

@Mego ...says nothing about bug-fixes. Which falls into a gray area from my perspective.

Dennis

11:36 PM

Why? Both answers are equally boring.

feersum

I'm talking about cases where a function that is useless for general-purpose programming is added to solve a specific challenge.

The blame for such a function lies squarely on the language author.

Anonymous

@El'endiaStarman Bug fixes are fundamentally no different than removing an old feature and adding a new one. The implementation defines the language.

quartata

blame Wolfram

El'endia Starman

@Mego And that stance is not one I agree with.

If you disagree with that part of my recent Meta answer, please, post a comment or another answer. You're part of the community and ought to make your voice known. (You could also downvote my answer, but you said earlier that you like the looser definition of "unfair advantage".)

Anonymous

@El'endiaStarman I will after I eat dinner :)

El'endia Starman

11:43 PM

:)

Alex A.

@Mego What are you having?

Doorknob

// slurp the entire template file into memory
// yum

I am good at comments

Alex A.

o_o

Adnan

@quartata For now, there's a list with all commands found here.

quartata

@Adnan Thanks

Doorknob

11:50 PM

// this is that thing
let mut thing = HashMap::new();

I am also good at variable names

quartata

You should submit your code to CR and see how they react

Also what are you writing that uses Rust

Alex A.

> ಠ_ಠ — All of Code Review, 2 minutes ago

Doorknob

@quartata a thing for my new wobsite design (once I'm finished I'll post it here for feedback :P)

Alex A.

@Doorknob Sounds like something you should post to Code Review ;P

Doorknob

Maybe I will once this code stops being a horrible mess

quartata

11:58 PM

post it as a horrible mess and they'll fix it for you

that's the point

(not really)

Alex A.

2 mins ago, by Alex A.

> ಠ_ಠ — All of Code Review, 2 minutes ago

Doorknob

> Limitations
[...]
Date types are limited in about +/- 262,000 years from the common epoch.

Yeah sorry I think that's gonna be a dealbreaker

Transcript for