Skip to main content
24 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:43 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://dba.stackexchange.com/ with https://dba.stackexchange.com/
Apr 16, 2014 at 13:25 vote accept Jack Douglas
Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40 history edited m0saMod
edited tags
Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40 answer added m0saMod timeline score: 19
Jun 2, 2013 at 23:21 answer added Antony timeline score: 13
Jan 4, 2013 at 6:56 history edited Lance Roberts
edited tags
Sep 4, 2012 at 6:46 comment added Shegit Brahm Why only at a certain rep limit? Established User is 1000 rep. But you can start reviewing with 200 rep. And commenting above 50 rep. I don't see the need of user separation (maybe because I have less 1k rep)
Sep 4, 2012 at 6:43 comment added Jack This would be nice indeed; I often click into a question thinking it was asked by someone with 3k+ rep (which for me translates as interesting) only to find out it was edited by that user =/
Sep 4, 2012 at 5:32 history edited Jack Douglas CC BY-SA 3.0
added rep-limit suggestion from Mark Hurd
Aug 31, 2012 at 2:05 comment added Mark Hurd +1 But this UI change should only be for users of a certain rep.
Aug 28, 2012 at 6:25 history edited Jack Douglas CC BY-SA 3.0
Added suggestion to remove 'ago' and corrected grammar in title
Aug 27, 2012 at 13:08 review Close votes
Aug 29, 2012 at 0:01
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:49 comment added Jack Douglas @AndriyM 'bumped'?
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:48 comment added Andriy M What would the word be for questions poked by Community? poked?
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:46 comment added Jack Douglas @casperOne It may be there to avoid tiny links like "1s" - which wouldn't be necessary if other text was added.
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:36 comment added casperOne Mod @JackDouglas I can get behind that. Seems very redundant; if you think that time is indicative of something that's going to happen in the future, then you've got bigger problems on your hands.
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:35 comment added casperOne Mod @ShaWizDowArd I can see how that's helpful, but it's a secondary usage of the front page, not the primary usage (or at least, not the intended usage). If anything, I'd say those edits should be in a separate list that's slated for review. Chances are if that happens, the new /review queue is going to pick that up (at least I'd hope so).
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:33 comment added Jack Douglas @casperOne I wondered about suggesting removing the word 'ago'?
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:31 comment added Shadow Wizard @casper actually the reputation display help me notice potential non answers - seeing 1 rep user modifying question with over 100 views is usually suspicious. 50% of the times, it should be a comment.
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:28 comment added casperOne Mod @ShaWizDowArd No downvotes yet, doesn't seem like anyone is unhappy with the prospect yet. Also, reputation score could be removed from that list to make space. It doesn't really help with anything. You shouldn't care if questions are added/edited/answered based on reputation.
Aug 27, 2012 at 12:12 comment added Shadow Wizard Thanks @casper we should also consider the risk of cluttering the list, guess not everyone will be happy with such change.
Aug 27, 2012 at 11:55 comment added casperOne Mod @ShaWizDowArd I can't agree about cost. While I don't know exactly how the data is stored, I imagine it's just a top 1 on a highly optimized index on the last updated/modified/answered fields. Same for the cache. But, yes, it's up to SE to decide.
Aug 27, 2012 at 11:23 comment added Shadow Wizard Good suggestion, but I suspect the cost is pretty high.. let the devs decide though.
Aug 27, 2012 at 11:11 history asked Jack Douglas CC BY-SA 3.0