cv-pls python Code not implemented or not working as intended: Calling a function perfectly where arguments of functions are variable - Tanvir‎ - 2018-11-26 18:07:14Z

@SimonForsberg ^These are the discussions I really want to prevent, when placing "helpful" comments along with my CV's. Or wasn't I polite, clear and helpful enough in 1st place?

Sorry for the triple ping.

@SimonForsberg BTW: No one boxes here please. Prefix such links with a > next time. I don't know how to change that now. Maybe you still can do so.

cv-pls python No code to review SumOfSquarePositive python - Ali‎ - 2018-11-26 18:30:06Z

@Makyen How is editing and collapsing one boxes done by room owners?

Or should I move that to the graveyard?

@πάνταῥεῖ Messages can only be edited by the user posting them (for 2 minutes) and by moderators. Your only option as an RO is to move it to a different room (e.g. /dev/null, as the Graveyard is for complete or expired requests).

@Makyen But I've seen one-boxes collapsed. These probably were last minute OP edits then? I had to do such myself sometimes, but remember that some of my one-boxes were edited not by me, and even not moved to the graveyard room? Do I?

Can the mods do this?

collapsing oneboxes just means replacing the oneboxes with a link typically, I know of no automated way to 'collapse' a onebox otherwise (see my tests in the SE sandbox)

and mods can edit others messages, yes

(evidenced by the edit I just did to your last message)

@ThomasWard That might be the case for some things I (believe) have observed. Ty for the clarification.

well I can show you a prime example here but i'd be treading upon your rules briefly :P

I see your powers, no worries ;-)

well as long as my great diamond powers are not in question :P

returns to lurkmode

@ThomasWard May I ping you politely to collapse @Simon's one box :3

specific item is...?

since i'm operating in tiny-screen mode :|

@ThomasWard I was in time editing my request :D

collapsified.

goes to seek more coffee

Cool ty. I'll remember next time.

@ThomasWard I've got plenty of it, you're welcome :3

@πάνταῥεῖ This has basically been covered by ThomasWard, but... ROs can't edit messages posted by others. ROs can only move them. Any edits you've seen to collapse a onebox was either by the author of the message and within the 2 minute window, or by a moderator. At one point in time, ROs could delete messages by other users, but that was eliminated some time ago. Only the message author can delete the message (again, only within the 2 minute window), or a moderator.

ROs can see the history for deleted messages, thus getting their content. The SOCVR Archiver script automatically fetches that history and makes the deleted content visible upon hover, or you can click on it to have all deleted messages shown (option is persistent). The Archiver also fetches deleted messages and adds them to transcript pages.

and only those of us with pointy edges can actually edit things to un-onebox them

so you're limited to moves and history view

ROs can't delete other people's messages. They used to be able to do so within the 2 minute window, but that's no longer possible, or at least it no longer worked in my testing.

bleh i mistyped heh

rages because running at 500000 RPMs

@πάνταῥεῖ There's two of your comments that I'd like to comment on:

The first comment asks "What do you mean by 'unfortunately it is not working'" followed by "It is not working".

It's not a bad comment, but you are essentially telling the OP that "Your code is not working" without explaining what it means for something to be "working", which was apparently the confusion here. (As it usually is)

@SimonForsberg Well, your comment added what's already said in the close (on hold) banner now. Did I miss something in 1st place? Should I have placed these links as well?

Your second comment brings up the subject of cross-posting, which really is only relevant when it's on-topic on both sites. In this case the question is off-topic on CR so there's no issue with the cross-posting.

@πάνταῥεῖ My recent comment hopefully clarified what it means for something to be working, and serves as a friendly reminder to come back and get the code improved once the code is working

And about this:

@SimonForsberg I absolutely agree with the conclusion taken by newbs for "it's not working" They're just happy they got their stuff passing their compiler, and now that code doesn't even closely what they intend it should do.

I've seen these misconceptions a felt billion of times.

I would sure love to see where exactly the guy was referred to CR. I hope it was not on an exactly identical question posted on SO. People tend to post one thing on SO, they get referred to CR and then they post something different on CR and then they say "But I was told to come here!"

@SimonForsberg Isn't duma bot responsible to take care about these cases?

KI isn't what it used to be in the good 'ole days :3

@πάνταῥεῖ "duma bot"? Are you talking about @Duga?

@Simon An please don't feel unhonested or such regarding my recent complain about your one box. Mod's are appreciated to participate here, but our rules in our room will be the room owner's rules, and as these are not beyond anything illegal for SE, these should be respected.

@SimonForsberg Yeah, Duga I meant.

@πάνταῥεῖ Duga catches comments mentioning Code Review, sure, I went through the last hours of such detected comments but I did not find anything recommending this particular user to come to CR.

@SimonForsberg They've either recommending themselves, or a corresponding Q has been already deleted from SO?

@πάνταῥεῖ Some of the posts I went through were deleted already. I got 10K+ though so I can see those. If the user was recommended CR, it wasn't very recently.

@SimonForsberg At SO? I am also able to see deleted posts at SO, at least if I am able to grab a link for them.

@πάνταῥεῖ At SO yes. You can check the comments @Duga posted in The 2nd Monitor if you want to, those are the links I used.

@SimonForsberg Well, another browser tab to keep open :D ...

But to come back at the original topic. IMO such comments as I've done, or yours as proposed would just do more harm than clarification. At least not any clarification that appears with the close vote/[on hold] banners shown to the OP already. [on hold] makes the OP aware that their question is considered off-topic, and also gives the right links to show them how the post can/must be improved.

I believe that's fairly enough what should be told these users. If you believe it's not, it's probably time to overwork the close reason banner texts.

Or getting clearer in guidelines how and when these should be applied.

The irony here is that SO already had undergone a big process of adapting close reasons and their clear messages years ago. The need for this increased with popularity of the site.

cv-pls python Code not implemented or not working as intended: Object Object Oriented Programming Python - Andrij Kusmich‎ - 2018-11-26 20:12:35Z

^Homework dump

@SimonForsberg @πάνταῥεῖ remind me, is that "blatantly offtopic" or...?

because that's not even related to CR :P

@πάνταῥεῖ Call me weird, but I prefer human interaction and not only machine messages. There's also been issues with people not getting notified when their question is put on hold. A comment on their question however, that I know that they are always notified about. There's no closed reason in the world that could convince me that it's a bad idea to also post a comment.

@ThomasWard you mean this question? codereview.stackexchange.com/q/208472 It's a traditional "You haven't implemented any code. Get your code working first and then come back"

Note that this comment applies to both "code not implemented" and "code not working":

@SimonForsberg yep that one. :)

I can see it not being a CR request either, though, and therefore being blatantly offtopic as "Just asking us to write code for them" but meh

my votes don't count yet :p

@ThomasWard Sure. But how would that affect anything? We don't have a "blatantly offtopic" reason.

true, but I mean for the flaggers without direct VTC :P

And telling people "This is blatantly offtopic" doesn't help either.

I also could custom VTC but irrelevant yet. (besides i'm curious what the common VTCs are here, for when I do get the priv :P)

@ThomasWard Flaggers can flag it as "not working or not implemented"

@ThomasWard Not working or not implemented is beyond a doubt the most common one

@SimonForsberg Well, I've got really bad experience doing so (you mentioned to know my history) at SO. I've been probably flagged to obstruction for being unwelcoming_/_snarky there. I always have been acting within the assume good intend policy IMO.

cv-pls delete-pls Clueless: Meanings to the functions to these python functions?

There is a "Blatantly off-topic (this question has nothing to do with code review request)" should be closed➞off-topic flag reason. That reason does not exist in the close-vote dialog. Instead of the "Blatantly off-topic" reason, the close-vote dialog has user-specified custom reasons. This is the case on all SE sites I've been able to check.

If it's "blatantly" off-topic, then it should be easy to cite at least one of the close reasons listed in the Help Center.

cv-pls python Wrong results: Using numpy array operations to solve 2D partial differential equation

@200_success At least on SO, while it's easy to site a reason that's in the on-topic page, that doesn't mean it's easy to assign it to a specific close reason in the close-vote dialog (I'm not familiar enough with CR to say wrt. CR). On SO, there's no close-vote reason that's "Your question about X (e.g. how to peal a banana) doesn't even come close to being about programming." There's a close reason that's somewhat intended to be used that way, but it's worded about general computing topics.

@200_success Because I didn't have an example of the CR close-vote dialog in front of me.

@πάνταῥεῖ As I've said before, if you stick to the auto-comments you should be fine.