banned?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

33 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Aug 21, 2017 at 15:04	comment	added	EKons		whathaveyoutried.com (yeah the ban seems to be failing...) What have you tried? this one too
Jun 20, 2013 at 2:06	comment	added	Adam Rackis		I'm not sure this post is really worthy of anything more than a url slapped into a comment. I'd say OP's choices are read the link, or be q-banned before too long.
Mar 21, 2013 at 2:45	history	edited	Shog9	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 168 characters in body
Sep 15, 2012 at 13:31	history	edited	Bill the Lizard	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 5 characters in body
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:42	comment	added	user164207		@NicolBolas - Did you miss the part of my comment above where I said that "I know that Stack Exchange isn't a democracy"?
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:41	comment	added	user164207		@NicolBolas - "However good a resource may be, links alone are not helpful." That's absurd. Links to quality resources don't necessarily need paragraphs of boilerplate or context. Otherwise, documentation would be useless.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:40	comment	added	Nicol Bolas		@Jack: And the devs (and basic courtesy) have made it clear that pure WHYT links are not acceptable. The devs own the site, they make the rules.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:39	comment	added	user164207		@TimYiJiang - The community has made it pretty clear that WHYT links should be acceptable.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:38	comment	added	Nicol Bolas		@JackManey: "How is it condescending to point an OP to resources to help him/her ask better questions?" Did you miss the part of my post where I said, "simply posting a link to that site and nothing more"? However good a resource may be, links alone are not helpful. And in this case, the condescension due to the implicit assumption in the question that the OP hasn't tried anything.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:36	comment	added	Yi Jiang		@JackManey Is it blatant disinterest in user feedback if the developers are, as per this post, making changes based on user feedback? I personally disagree with the blanket ban, but that's what Meta is for, to poke the developers with pointy sticks if we disagree with what they're doing (and personally, I find the new solution to be much more agreeable)
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:27	comment	added	user164207		@NicolBolas - How is it condescending to point an OP to resources to help him/her ask better questions? By the same line of reasoning, it would supposedly be condescending to link to the SO FAQ. So, do you support the banning of links to stackoverflow.com/faq as well?
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:24	comment	added	Nicol Bolas		@Jack: "Is there a reason behind the blatant disinterest in user feedback?" Because user behavior is exactly what we're trying to correct. Community feedback stops being useful when you're trying to change community behavior, particularly that of the more vocal MSO users. However useful what lies on the end of "what have you tried?" is, simply posting a link to that site and nothing more is rather condescending to the OP. And we want to stop condescension. That's why the WSOiN was deleted: to end the condescension.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:20	comment	added	user164207		I know that Stack Exchange isn't a democracy and all that, but I'm with @DavidRobinson. First Shog9 decides one day that he'd like to delete WSOiN without any warning and simply deletes it with no discussion, and now this... Is there a reason behind this recent, blatant disinterest in user feedback?
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:20	comment	added	Nicol Bolas		@David "especially since the previous question on the topic showed the community is strongly opposed to such a ban." Yes, because this would totally be the first time the devs have done something the community didn't approve of or like. The community may get to speak it's piece here on MSO, but don't take that to mean that you have any actual power.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:15	comment	added	Adam Lear StaffMod		@DavidRobinson Yeah, basically. Although as Shog9 said, we're going to set up a better rule that only blocks the link by itself and lets more helpful, elaborate comments go through.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:01	comment	added	David Robinson		It bothers me that a dev would do this without bringing the topic up in Meta, especially since the previous question on the topic showed the community is strongly opposed to such a ban.
Sep 15, 2012 at 4:00	comment	added	David Robinson		@AnnaLear: so that won't be banned. However, will `[what have you tried?](whathaveyoutried.com)` be banned? If so, all that is doing is letting people leave the exact same comment but giving them a little extra work to do so.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:35	comment	added	Adam Lear StaffMod		That's fair. I'll note, though, that you can use Markdown to format the link however you like. For example, `[what have you tried?](http://mattgemmell.com/2008/12/08/what-have-you-tried/)` will yield "what have you tried?".
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:31	comment	added	Marcin		@AnnaLear The full url is truncated. Accordingly, it looks like any other random resource. The redirect leaves the title of the post visible. As a result, people clicking it know, at least slightly, what they are getting. It also poses the question the title is made of, emphasising however it is spelled out in the comment.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:28	comment	added	Adam Lear StaffMod		@Marcin If you don't mind me asking, in an absolutely non-sarcastic way, what's that reason?
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:23	comment	added	Marcin		@AnnaLear I know I could link to the full url. There's a reason I don't link to the full blog url. If I wanted to just link to the whole url, I would, and I wouldn't have noticed this ban.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:18	history	edited	Shog9	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 177 characters in body
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:17	comment	added	Adam Lear StaffMod		@Marcin Lemme spell it out: since it's a redirect, you could just link to the actual address instead of "whathaveyoutried.com". This would raise the bar a bit and help ensure that folks who are just keen on leaving a curt "whathaveyoutried" comment and moving on are blocked while comments with a bit of effort behind them get through.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:14	comment	added	Marcin		I still have no idea why you are so keen on informing me that it is a redirect. The restriction was certainly not that there had to be something else in the comment, as a comment meeting that description could not be posted.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:12	comment	added	Shog9		sigh... It's Friday night, and I quite honestly don't have the energy for this. The blacklist is off for tonight - it'll be turned back on tomorrow, with the restriction that there has to be something else in the comment - not just a bare link.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:10	comment	added	Marcin		I know it's a redirect. What is your point?
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:09	comment	added	Shog9		@Marcin: whathaveyoutried.com is a redirect. The actual site is mattgemmell.com, and the redirect goes to a specific post of his, neither of which are blacklisted. But... I gotta ask you, please, when you link to this stuff try to help the person you're writing to relate it to what he's asking - the post is a couple pages long, and I doubt too many people read it unless they're given some reason to do so up front.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:07	comment	added	Marcin		Why don't you come out and ask your actual question rather than being passive aggressive? If you're asking what I did, I posted a comment asking OP to "read ssce.org, and as a bonus whathaveyoutried.com". I could not post it because it was banned. I doubt this gives you any more information than the fact that I included both the link and other text.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:04	comment	added	Shog9		@Marcin: please tell me that you have actually visited the site... No snark there, no sarcasm, I'm starting to be genuinely concerned. It's a real website with real advice on it and a real person behind it.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:02	comment	added	Marcin		I don't know what you mean. Whatever snark you're trying to lay down, the fact is it's banned whether or not there is further explication.
Sep 15, 2012 at 3:00	comment	added	Shog9		@Marcin: read what I wrote closely. And... Then visit whathaveyoutried.com. Maybe look at your address bar...
Sep 15, 2012 at 2:58	comment	added	Marcin		You know it's banned even when other text is present, right?
Sep 15, 2012 at 2:50	history	answered	Shog9	CC BY-SA 3.0

toggle format