IPS Meta Comments

Thanks for all the cool edits. Don't hesitate to ask if you need clarification from my behalf. — Arthur Havlicek 2 mins ago

@scohe001 so I can just post a question here and you guys will make sure it's on topic for the real site? — temp 2 mins ago

@scohe001 I have looked at the FAQ. That having been said, as you've provided that link, you've no doubt noticed it's in meta It would make a great sticky post, except SE doesn't have sticky posts. As such, it's fundamentally buried in all of the rest of meta. As such, it's a needle in a haystack that's filled with needles, and thus a lot harder to stumble across than the stuff in the help center. — Ed Grimm Feb 8 at 1:16

@scohe001 I have looked at the FAQ. That having been said, as you've provided that link, you've no doubt noticed it's in meta It would make a great sticky post, except SE doesn't have sticky posts. As such, it's fundamentally buried in all of the rest of meta. As such, it's a needle in a haystack that's filled with needles, and thus a lot harder to stumble across than the stuff in the help center. — Ed Grimm Feb 8 at 1:16

@EdG have you taken a look at our FAQ? That's usually my go to for meta links for the big stuff (like citation expectations). — scohe001 1 min ago

I'd suspect there's some reluctance in the community to cite a requirement that is only posted in meta. I understand this is more of a 'stack exchange only allows very restricted help center updates' issue, but the reason for that issue doesn't change the issue. I know I've personally gone into review a few times, and then couldn't do the review because I didn't have the reference handy (mostly my own issue, but if I could just point to the help center how to write a good answer question it would be easier). — Ed Grimm 2 mins ago

Nothing comes to mind, I think it looks great! — Upper_Case yesterday

Nothing comes to mind, I think it looks great! — Upper_Case 1 min ago

Good call @Upper. I've edited it to try to make it more clear why I'm not a fan of that approach. Let me know if you see anything else! — scohe001 1 min ago

Yes, that explanation makes sense to me. Adding a clause somewhere in the paragraph after the quote block could make that clear in the question itself, but I don't know how much that would affect answers you get (though I imagine it might change the tone of some answers). — Upper_Case 2 mins ago

@Upper it's not the in place correction I have an issue with with that friend's approach, but more that the cadence of the conversation was broken by a sudden exclamation in the middle of the sentence. I don't doubt that an in place fix (or maybe after the sentence?) will be the best answer here, but how that will look is what I'm interested in. Does that make sense? — scohe001 58 secs ago

I think this question looks fine for posting, but answers might be scattered. "Minimiz[ing] the break in flow in the conversation [...]" is awkward to consider alongside your feeling that a simple, in-place correction of the mistaken word does not minimize that enough. It's not clear where the division between expressing a correction and being too flow-breaking could fall that would make one answer better than another. Maybe you could expand a bit on how or why making the correction feels that way to you? I'm having trouble precisely grasping your experience of that aspect. — Upper_Case 15 secs ago

I've made it explicit which goals the two friends' approaches don't fulfill @Tink. As far as my own approach though, I've been thinking about this to the point that when it happens to me now, I overthink it. I'm not sure what my own natural approach is at this point honestly. — scohe001 2 mins ago

Yep, better! So, two friends, two approaches... what's yours and how does it/your friends' approaches not meet these goals? — Tinkeringbell ♦ 2 mins ago

@Tink good point. "Recover" was my word of choice for a solution that fulfills all of my goals. I've edited it out of the body (but left it in the title). Do you think that's more clear? — scohe001 2 mins ago