Timeline for Is a new comment format for duplicate votes being tested?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
39 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 5 at 16:45 | comment | added | muru | @TylerH maybe, if you rephrase that as "this new wording is somehow newly attributing advice in the comment to the source user", then you're closer to what I am complaining about. If you think the post doesn't reflect that, you're welcome to suggest alternative wording that might help. | |
| Jul 5 at 16:20 | comment | added | TylerH | @muru "that something has "always" been the case certainly has never stopped SE from changing things." Sure, but that's not what I'm arguing. What it does is undermine the argument that this new wording is somehow newly attributing the comment to the source user. This question is largely phrased as you being upset that this comment is now being attributed to you, but in reality such comments have always been attributed to you. | |
| Jul 5 at 16:14 | comment | added | muru | Also, that something has "always" been the case certainly has never stopped SE from changing things. | |
| Jul 5 at 16:13 | comment | added | muru | @TylerH and as long as the wording was minimal, I didn't mind that it was attributed to me. That doesn't mean that SE has carte blanche on that subject and can post whatever it wants in my name. I do most certainly object to more and more text being attributed to me. | |
| Jul 5 at 14:35 | comment | added | TylerH | @ShadowWizard Other users can't see pending close votes. But they can see successful close votes/flags and always have been able to do so. And they've always been able to see when a user flags or close-votes a question as a duplicate, too, because this auto-comment has always been attributed to the user casting the flag/vote. | |
| Jul 5 at 14:31 | comment | added | TylerH | @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog "It's also worsened by the fact [...]" Why does not being able to delete the comment yourself make the phrasing (or the feature itself) worse? If a user flags a post as a duplicate, chances are they did so intentionally. If by chance they accidentally flagged a post as a duplicate, they can retract their post flag and can then flag the auto-comment as no-longer needed. Ideally they would be able to self-delete the comment, yes, but hardly seems like a glaring issue to me. | |
| Jul 5 at 14:29 | comment | added | TylerH | "I strongly dislike having so much verbiage being attributed to me." The duplicate vote auto-comments have always been attributed to the person casting the vote (or flag). This is not new; only the wording of the comment has changed. | |
| Jul 2 at 16:08 | history | edited | SlateStaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 1 at 13:20 | answer | added | Neinstein | timeline score: 17 | |
| Jun 30 at 17:48 | answer | added | GSerg | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jun 29 at 21:17 | comment | added | President James K. Polk | The previous version was just fine. The version before that was also just fine. This version is just fine. A significant percentage of askers ignore all comments anyway. It's not been my experience that longer and more detailed is better. My experience is that if you have two sentences in a communication, only the first sentence is read. If you have two clauses in a sentence, only the first clause is read. And the new version has the important part right at the beginning. | |
| Jun 29 at 3:40 | answer | added | starball | timeline score: 14 | |
| Jun 28 at 21:01 | comment | added | tdy | At the very least, it's a grammar [bug]. Even if they want to keep this new template, It should either be "edit the question to make it clear how..." or "edit the question, making it clear how..." or "edit the question; make it clear how..." | |
| Jun 28 at 17:19 | history | edited | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 28 at 17:12 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | @F1Krazy To be entirely pedantic, it was originally "possible duplicate of" with a lowercase P. | |
| Jun 28 at 16:27 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @muru I'd go with the direction of privacy: casting flags and close votes is considered private, one can't see other user's flags or close vote same way they can't see upvotes and downvotes being cast. So having that auto comment is a privacy breach, perhaps this way SE will finally nuke it. (As they always claim to care for our privacy.) | |
| Jun 28 at 15:35 | history | edited | muru | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 266 characters in body
|
| Jun 28 at 15:04 | comment | added | muru | @VLAZ since this is a support/bug post, that makes it likely it will be marked as status-bydesign and never looked at again. Guess I'll have to post a separate feature request | |
| Jun 28 at 14:18 | comment | added | VLAZ | This is a feature request on MSO that was just marked [status-completed]: meta.stackoverflow.com/a/430805 | |
| Jun 28 at 12:54 | answer | added | Shadow Wizard | timeline score: -7 | |
| Jun 28 at 9:25 | comment | added | Marijn | @muru indeed attributing it to Community would be nicer. However, I do occasionally get replies from the OP to the (author of the) auto-comment saying "that one doesn't answer my question because X is different", which would not be possible anymore without following the post. | |
| Jun 28 at 9:20 | comment | added | muru | @Marijn the banner appears as soon as the first duplicate vote is cast. At any rate, I don't want it to be posted as if I was saying it. | |
| Jun 28 at 9:14 | comment | added | Marijn | @muru the comment is posted on the first close vote, the banner only after the question is closed (I think?). The sooner the question is edited the better. | |
| Jun 28 at 9:11 | comment | added | muru | @Marijn isn't it the same advice they get in a big notice on top of the question? | |
| Jun 28 at 9:09 | comment | added | Marijn | Actually I do like the new auto-comment, it gives very actionable advice and it might help people understand the concept of 'duplicate' on SE. | |
| Jun 28 at 8:50 | comment | added | F1Krazy | I still miss the time when the auto-generated dupe comment just said "Possible duplicate of [question title]." | |
| Jun 28 at 8:33 | history | edited | GlorfindelMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 28 at 7:59 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | Finally, it's not grammatically correct: it's a run-on sentence (comma splice): parts of a sentence that can stand alone as their own sentence cannot be put together using only a comma; either a conjunction word or a semicolon must be used. | |
| Jun 28 at 7:53 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | It also makes no sense when voting to close as a duplicate of an unanswered question (allowed on meta sites as well as on main sites if the question was posted by the same author), since it makes a reference to non-existent answers. This was also a flaw in the old automatic comment. | |
| Jun 28 at 7:48 | comment | added | VLAZ | @ShadowWizard I don't see how it's be a bug as in unintentional error. At best, it's something they planned to roll out and the "bug" is that they rolled it out early. But overall, it seems quite intentional. | |
| Jun 28 at 7:46 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | I really really hope it's just a bug. Otherwise, very very bad decision of someone in SE. I'm not surprised a bit they make bad decisions, but still sad every time I see one. | |
| Jun 28 at 7:45 | history | edited | Shadow Wizard |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 28 at 7:25 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | It's also worsened by the fact that users without the required reputation to comment cannot delete automatic comments that were posted on their behalf. | |
| Jun 28 at 7:19 | history | edited | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 28 at 7:19 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | This question is similar to: How does duplicate closing work? When is a question a duplicate, and how should duplicate questions be handled?. If you believe it’s different, please edit the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem. (The previous text was automatically generated by the system upon casting a duplicate vote; I've removed the vote.) | |
| Jun 28 at 6:38 | comment | added | muru | I cast it directly. The problem with editing is that edited auto comments don't get cleaned up automatically. :( | |
| Jun 28 at 6:36 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | BTW, did you cast it directly, or via the review? If review, it might be a review feature. | |
| Jun 28 at 6:35 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | Yeah this is really bad, and will make people stop voting to close as duplicate. In the meanwhile, you can edit or delete the comment. | |
| Jun 28 at 6:27 | history | asked | muru | CC BY-SA 4.0 |