@Discretelizard Appreciate the insight and noted. I just want to make sure this community is managed right. We're doing this because we love it, and we don't want to see anyone abuse it including Strangeworks staff.

Greeting from CQuIC (Center for Quantum Informatoin and Control)!

Thank folks to put this stackexchange zone up!

@Mithrandir24601 Noted. Removed my yelling (assuming I know what you mean)

@Discretelizard Thanks :)

(although a few others did want the ticker :P)

@Blue You could also have a message feed for the main site questions as well... (note: when I suggested this, while I don't think anyone disagreed, no-one actually agreed either)

@Mithrandir24601 The Ticker is the spawn of satan. Feeds are fine. Stick with one for bounties and meta for now

@Blue Yeah, questions go slow, but steady,

@Discretelizard That's at least 3 of us then

@XiaodongQi No, thank you for joining us! Be sure to invite your friends and colleagues.

@whurley Oh, but I do think that this is appropriate behaviour. If SE staff links their blog network-wide, why wouldn't you link your blog here? Besides, I'm sure people would be very much interested to learn more about your mysterious... organisation.

Don't think we will get flooded any time soon.

Oh and since I can't just shut up: I must say that I do like the content we've gathered here so far. They appear to be high-level questions with thorough answers. Good job everyone! Keep it up!

@Blue I'm sorry, but I'm going to put my foot down on this one. This isn't as bad as it seems because 1) If it truly is very very bad, you can convince Robert to change it. 2) In our current formative stage, it is good that there are suggestions which are borderline. Why? Because only by pushing our borders, we can find out what we want and what we don't. But for this, meta is essential!

@Blue And you're the one complaining about excessive talking of tags!

@Blue No, I explicitly ask people to create tags freely.

@Blue ??? Taking it to meta is different from taking it to staff!

ON META

I mean, like I said before, BAD TAGS WILL BE KILLED AND BURNED.

@Blue No, it really isn't. I'll dig up some sources.

Oh and one more thing, in the end, massive community consensus is required to force people to change their posts significantly. Take care when editing.

@Blue Now that is an opinion

@Blue I think I've made it clear that I wont

@Blue Yes, let's call everything opinions. I'm sure that'll help (Ok, I started it, but still)

I mean, really, bad tags aren't such a big deal. On CS, we have like 6 tags of which the main purpose is to never use them!

@Blue Yeah, that's totally unwarranted, but sure, act on your dislike

I mean, your vote is your vote. None of my business.

@Blue Well, that's one way to put it. I agree that you disapprove, but I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree for now.

Oooh, @Blue Can you change the chat room name?

@Blue :D

@Blue God forbid we define our own terms! Don't you understand that tag usage guidance solves some of your problems with the name. Sigh, whatever I don't care. I do care about you following proper procedure here, so I'm not going to do anything unless it goes through proper channels.

@Blue See this for more info on tags: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/18878/… . Although it explicitely states to not create new tags unless needed, BE AWARE THAT WE BARELY HAVE ANY TAGS! So, this is exactly the moment we should do the opposite and create a lot of tags! Also, why do you think creating a new tag is so easy?

@Blue Have you looked at other sites. Plenty more tags. Note that it is likely the tag numbers barely will change, we should expect the current tags to be used very often. If it turns out that, after a long time, in practice, tags are unused, then that is another reason to remove it. But that is too soon

@Blue That's what I DID. I've like done 4 or 5.

@Blue Why shouldn't we direct crackpots to counter-arguments of crackpottery. Think about it. This tag is basically a honeypot for them ;)

But, really, I've said enough. I hope you agree on that, at least. Just leave it be for now. Let it be for a week, then look again and take it to meta if you wish to kill it.

@Blue Yeah, just mentioning for the record. Most people don't know this.

IMO, the more tags, the merrier (for now). We can clean up later. Now's brainstorming time!

@Blue Yeah, exactly. Which is why I suggested taking it to meta if you insist. But I think just waiting is for the best.

But well, you may disagree on that. Know also that re: scientists, TCS has a lot of tags that are even barely used (the have one for their 'arXiv classifications')

@Blue Also note that you're probably right that we need renaming (can we keep it as a synomym?) and also that I'm kinda trying to start an argument as this is the phase were such arguments are most useful. Fail hard and learn, as they say.

@Blue Yeah, we've said enough. Excuse me for taking the 'last word', but note that I think we should tag 'recklessly' because were are still small!

Better have bad tags now, than when there are 100 questions with bad tags!

@Blue The tag, which you suggested. I'm actually okay with having another name and have 'quantum-mythology' as a synonym (like quantum myths). But still, better to wait.

Also, I'm trying to argue with the best intentions here, not just because I like to have an argument :'

@Blue Yeah, see you. Good luck. I'm basically slacking off during a lecture ;)

@Blue Oh and btw, part of this is cultural: the Dutch tend to try and create compromises.

By arguing.

A lot

Just a half-hearted attempt, but curious about opinions in changing the cube to some (abstract) shape with more topical meaning?

@JustinYouens I like the idea. Maybe you can make a meta post about it.

@Blue Ah, I didn't see you chat earlier...

@whurley suggest just pay attn to votes for now. hopefully the community will be aware/ understand Strangeworks special status wrt the site, but there could be debate/ pushback at times. SE does have sometimes strict policies on "promotion" but theyre deliberately vague and generally up to mods to decide. whoever becomes mod(s) on the site will have a big impact on what is tolerated/ accepted/ leadership etc. ps watched your coloreful/ wild keynote. esp lol the part refd "weed" etc :P

@JustinYouens I just started a meta post based on your observation. quantumcomputing.meta.stackexchange.com/q/89/82

@JustinYouens Looks decent. Hey, any chance that your designer can make some posters? I might spread them around campus to recruit more students!

@Blue not a fan of new main site questions feed into the chat. why not just hit the main site?

@Blue didnt notice anyone asking for it? who asked for it?

ok.

btw wondering, any idea how SE automatically made you room owner?

@Blue You're the top user in the frequently in room page, which I think is based of messages or something

@vzn Yeah, I asked for it. I don't remember anyone agreeing or disagreeing, so if anyone does actually disagree then I think it's fair to see if we can get an actual consensus either way

@Blue Exact numbers have maybe changed since this was written, but:

So yeah, it's based on the number of messages :)

@vzn Ha ha agreed on mods. This is community run so I feel like that will all shake out. Re: keynote... yeah I'm colorful lol what can I say?

@Feeds you have a really boring name...