Timeline for Are our implicit-information tagging practices becoming a problem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 25, 2017 at 3:59 | history | edited | mxyzplkMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 215 characters in body
|
| May 25, 2017 at 3:26 | history | edited | mxyzplkMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 374 characters in body
|
| Nov 11, 2014 at 12:57 | comment | added | mxyzplk Mod | My point is someone can use tags in an unclear manner just like they can use their words in an unclear manner. There may be "no excuse" for it but trying to demand people restate everything they say in tags is not the answer. | |
| Nov 11, 2014 at 5:06 | comment | added | AgentPaper | Asking for clarification is all well and good, but it's no excuse for requiring clarification in the first place. | |
| Nov 11, 2014 at 3:02 | comment | added | doppelgreener | Sure, I understand they're getting used as shorthand. But in the above cases, what it's shorthand for isn't clear - except maybe in the last one, but then we can argue arbitrary levels of detail on what a RAW answer needs beyond "sticks to the rules". If it was clear, I would not be using these examples. I have no problem requesting clarification, but for whatever reason I see these situations coming up a lot and nobody else requesting it. | |
| Nov 11, 2014 at 2:57 | history | edited | BESW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Claims that no other citizen has ever used the system properly are demonstrably hyperbolic. Also unnecessary to get across your point, and kinda rude.
|
| Nov 11, 2014 at 2:47 | history | answered | mxyzplkMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |