« first day (861 days earlier)      last day (1826 days later) » 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 23:00

7:00 PM
last I checked, it did seem like there were a lot of people casting close votes who seem to think the way I did about a year ago
as in, I see what they mean, but they are being a bit harsh
Long time no see :)
I remember missing you, but I no longer remember why
Hopefully you are visiting the chat to forget
So not remembering is actually good thing
7:04 PM
Looking at the stats: The last two days have a closing average of 50%. The last seven days have 42.74%. 14 days is 35.23%, while 30 days is 35.14% and 90 days is 29.69%.
@PavelJanicek chat does seem to fill my mind with all manner of useless things
@HDE226868 so we're halfway to the goal
That's all 10k info. Mod tools do indicate a rise, on average, over the last year.
A large rise since the start of private beta.
And is it a bad thing?
I don't know.
it does seem like a waste of time.
if users are asking bad questions, they should stop.
7:09 PM
Amen, brother
Are there stats for numbers of closed questions (as opposed to percentages)?
@Mithrandir24601 Percentages.
there's a query for it
not the one I was thinking of, but it looks sortable
so between 40 and 50 within the last week...
Ah, no - it's not showing data from the last 3 days
yeah, it refreshes weekly
7:31 PM
So about 30 from the past the first 4 of the past 7 days, 66 from the fortnight, 150 in 30 days and 363 in 90 days (all exclude the past 3 or so days) - averages per day are 7.5 for the week, 6 for the fortnight, 5 + 5/9 from 30 days and just over 4 for 90 days. Plugging in the percentages gives averages of questions put in the queue per day as 17.5 over 7 days, 17 over the fortnight, 15.8 in 30 days and just over 14 for 90 days
In other words, there's been a slight increase in questions put into the queue
I am also observing the trend
Wait, that's assuming that the percentages given are of questions that are put into the queue
Which it seems to be as <50% of the questions visible are closed
And if we want actually useful percentages, we need to know the number of questions that have been asked in that time, but it looks like either the questions are getting worse, or the reviewers are getting harsher (as opposed to people just getting better at flagging to close, where there would be a decrease in the numbers going into the queue, but the percentage of closed questions would increase). I hope my thinking isn't way off
another possibility is that there are more reviewers
Not having the rep, I've never really properly looked at things like that, so I can't say anything on that front
How much rep do you need to vote for close?
or 3000?
7:39 PM
2k for low quality
I have no way of knowing how many users have earned that privilege over time
unless... a query counting the distinct users who have VTC'ed every week
which should factor in users with a lot of rep who are inactive (like me)
168 at the minute
if I didn't have a job right now, I would totally write that query
How does having more reviewers make more closed questions though?
I think there is badge to earn
7:43 PM
@Mithrandir24601 more reviewers means more votes cast
For closing or reviewing enough questions
I thought you needed 5 to close (unless 1 is a mod, I think)?
@Mithrandir24601 more votes cast means more votes cast on questions with votes cast
so questions with close votes that would not have been closed before are now being closed
because there are enough people to hammer all the nails
@DaaaahWhoosh yeah, but doesn't that mean that there's also going to be more votes to 'not close' as well?
@Mithrandir24601 yeah, I guess it'd also be useful to see how those percentages shift over time
7:45 PM
True that
@PavelJanicek Yep, there are badges for reviewing 1 item (bronze), 250 items (silver) and 1000 items (gold) for each review queue
Which reminds me I have about 700 reviewed items on StackOverflow
And I might hunt for that badge
I have almost 350 here...
(on first post)
I'm not really sure why no-one's came along and told me that I haven't got the rep to do as much reviewing as I do though :P
Because everyone is busy closing questions :)
Hm, my notebook battery is below 40 percent
And charger is over there
Which means I rather log off :)
8:20 PM
posted on January 25, 2017 by Monica Cellio

Image credit“A new goddess for Dal!” The warlord of Mel whistled in appreciation. “That’s bold.” “It will do the job,” the warlord of Sav answered. He watched a wave splash onto the shore. “Mel will need to confirm it. Do you think you can arrange that?” The other man looked confused. “What do you mean, ‘confirm’?” Another wave splashed in front of them. “The priestesses of Sav have just annou

8:33 PM
Afternoon folks.
8:46 PM
What up nex
Supervisor asked for a report of activity during a month he didn't ask me to monitor. You?
@NexTerren That sounds fun...luckily you have email. :D Eh. Avoiding some research I need to do at work and reading Wikipedia instead.
Yeah? What sort of wikipedia?
In narratology and comparative mythology, the monomyth, or the hero's journey, is the common template of a broad category of tales that involve a hero who goes on an adventure, and in a decisive crisis wins a victory, and then comes home changed or transformed. The concept was introduced by Joseph Campbell in The Hero with a Thousand Faces (1949), who described the basic narrative pattern as follows: A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious...
I've read it before...and I have and have read Campbell's book but...still interesting and gets the juices flowing.
9:30 PM
The hero's journey is a useful tool for a writer to have in their box, but I think Campbell's attempt to instead present it as an insight into some universal human truth has seriously crippled its toolworthyness while also fueling a contemporary fetish for its use.
That is: by trying to make his structure seem more universal than it is, Campbell made it too broad and vague. You can apply it to almost anything not because it's truly universal but because it's too slippery and stretchy to actually say anything useful about the things it can be applied to.
But that illusion of universality has led to storytellers, especially in film, taking it as a gospel text for successful narrative at the expense of other tools they could and should be using alongside or instead.
@BESW I would generally agree. It is very useful if flawed, but I find that to be true of most tools.
Except hammers, hammers are perfect.
He bit off more than he could chew, and pulled the teeth out of an otherwise interesting idea.
Not to mix my metaphors or anything.
the concept of the hero's journey seems to me as more of an after-the-fact kind of thing. Saying "I want to write a hero's journey story" seems backwards.
Yeah. He created it as an analytical tool, not a creative tool.
I guess it'd be interesting to analyze how different stories adhere or... dishere?... to the structure
9:38 PM
But in trying to make a one-size-fits-all Unified Theory of Story, he also accidentally sold corporate storytelling on the myth of the monomyth.
I think George Lucas did most of the selling
@BESW and that's why we have the same guy making Star Wars and Star Trek
@DaaaahWhoosh I'd ask a question on the Literature beta, but I don't think I could rein in my contempt enough to make it useful.
@James he was pretty good at selling things
@DaaaahWhoosh Ugh...god Hayden Christiansen.
Who by the way I've like in other movies (jumper)
but man was he a terrible (and terribly directed) Anakin
9:41 PM
holy crap, my computer just closed Visual Studio to save memory
I have never seen that before
@James I'd like to think it was the director more than the actor
and maybe the fact that the set was a green and blue box
@DaaaahWhoosh Stop setting the priority of your chrome porn windows higher.
in Not a bar, but plays one on TV, yesterday, by BESW
I have a new "game" for watching the Star Wars prequels: every time a CGI character is present for a conversation scene, pretend the live characters don't know the CGI character is there and see if the conversation still makes sense.
@DaaaahWhoosh Bit of both is my best guess
in Not a bar, but plays one on TV, yesterday, by BESW
(Bonus points if it works when there's only one live character in the conversation.)
whoa, my computer just ran out of memory and shut down
@James worth it
9:48 PM
@DaaaahWhoosh I told you! Turn off your porn
@DaaaahWhoosh lol...at least turn it off at work
that is sound advice
@BESW I feel like such a game would either not be fun, or be really sad
You could make it a drinking game.
@James I feel like such a game would either be tons of fun, or be really sad
9:52 PM
I like watching Ewan McGregor struggle with finding a non-existent eyeline.
I felt bad for Ewan McGregor in those films...
He is pretty freaking fantastic but he just couldn't overcome that crap-factory.
He's okay when he's the only live actor, except he can't track the CGI faces. But as soon as you put another human in the room he goes "Oh thank God!" and ignores the CGI as much as possible.
Part of it is the awful writing, too.
@BESW Ding ding ding
A lot of the time one or more characters, CGI or not, just don't have to be there for the conversation.
also, most of the time people are sitting down and talking
9:55 PM
When they're CGI, the conversation flows over and around them like everyone's following Campion's advice.
they seldom move while talking
> Pretend I'm not there. If you do it well enough the others will think they're seeing things and that always adds a little fun to the proceedings.
10:08 PM
@BESW wait, what is that from?
Margery Allingham's Police at the Funeral.
hmm. it seems very familiar
...do you watch old BBC mysteries?
but I probably should
in fact, there are a lot of things I should watch, and I will now travel home to watch some of them.
Peter Davison (also the Fifth Doctor and a main character in All Creatures Great and Small) played Campion in the BBC adaptations of Allingham's novels.
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 23:00

« first day (861 days earlier)      last day (1826 days later) »