Timeline for Should this dice question be open or closed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
30 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:22 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 7, 2019 at 20:49 | comment | added | Stackstuck | @Sycorax and I don't understand a word of the top answer on there. I can barely follow the next few. stats.SE is an alien place for someone who just wants to roll dice in a human-readable manner. | |
| May 6, 2019 at 15:32 | comment | added | Sycorax | @Stackstuck stats.stackexchange.com/questions/406723/… answers the original question in some detail, with algorithms of varying efficiency and ease of use. Reasoning about the number of [dice] tags on stats.SE will be misleading because dice are only interesting as abstractions to stats.SE, and are not much different from coins (equiv. d2) or labeled balls in an urn -- lots of probability distributions have an equivalent representation using dice rolling as a mechanism of randomness and vice versa. | |
| May 5, 2019 at 21:08 | history | edited | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 84 characters in body
|
| May 5, 2019 at 20:57 | history | edited | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 71 characters in body
|
| May 5, 2019 at 16:57 | history | edited | V2Blast | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 7 characters in body
|
| May 5, 2019 at 16:34 | history | edited | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 84 characters in body
|
| May 4, 2019 at 10:19 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | @nitsua60 ah yeah. I agree. I should have been more clear. I meant in my last comment to say "dice questions who explicitly are not RPG related" specifically. And it seems to me that the mentioned question does not fit into that and does not represent scope creep as well. | |
| May 4, 2019 at 2:21 | comment | added | nitsua60 Mod | @Rubiksmoose the question linked in the 7th comment strikes me as not-obviously-on, not-obviously-off. And given that, we give the benefit of the doubt to the poster and proceed apace. (For me that's not scope creep, btw. That's "we know our scope, and we're not sure if this is in it, but we'll proceed anyway--there's nothing that'll be done that can't be fixed!") | |
| May 4, 2019 at 2:12 | history | edited | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 16 characters in body
|
| May 4, 2019 at 2:03 | history | edited | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 113 characters in body
|
| May 4, 2019 at 2:01 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | @Stackstuck I don't necessarily agree that that particular question is actually on topic perse, but it is much more of a borderline case than this one. | |
| May 4, 2019 at 1:57 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | @Stackstuck I think if we want to be home to dice questions we need to face a serious discussion about expanding the scope of the site. Right now, it clearly doesn't fit with how we define ourselves. It doesn't mean that it can never be home here, but right now it isn't right. I don't think this will be a serious threat to the site or anything, but it sounds a lot like scope creep which should not be done thoughtlessly | |
| May 4, 2019 at 1:50 | comment | added | Roflo | If an answer similar to “roll 2d100 and reroll if >150” is a valid answer, then I’d keep it open. And close otherwise. | |
| May 4, 2019 at 1:13 | comment | added | Stackstuck | stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5652/… This is the sort of thing stats.SE would do with that dice question. I think not only can we be the better experts, but that we should be. | |
| May 4, 2019 at 0:24 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | @nitsua60 Because the question didn't have that qualifier that I proposed, mxy's point, in the larger sense, is consistent with how RPG.SE has evolved to determine question scope. Thus, your points I am in accord with. | |
| May 4, 2019 at 0:21 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | @Rubiksmoose Agree with this, of course. We can't keep everything around just because it might possibly be useful in an RPG context eventually right? | |
| May 4, 2019 at 0:20 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | @doppelgreener I had to laugh with your link to Cross Validated, given that the original question under consideration is one dealing with Christian things (though C.SE would not find it on topic) as its root concern. Unintentional humor is sometimes the best kind. :) | |
| May 3, 2019 at 23:53 | comment | added | nitsua60 Mod | @KorvinStarmast on your first comment, I agree that if someone (honestly) said "I need this to choose the psalm that determines <X> in my sandbox" it'd be on topic. And I suggest that this hypothetical would pass all the concerns in the comment I blockquoted, while the existing question doesn't. Do you have a feeling on the "not a real question" concerns? (Also, I agree about flight safety: this stack will neither stand nor fall on whether this particular question ends up open or closed. But I think it's a good conversation to have.) | |
| May 3, 2019 at 23:51 | comment | added | nitsua60 Mod | @Stackstuck it feels like you're getting hung up on "where does this fit on StackExchange?" But, frankly, it doesn't need to. The lack of a migration target doesn't in any way (IMO) impact how we think about what we think our scope should be. | |
| May 3, 2019 at 23:15 | comment | added | Stackstuck | @doppelgreener preliminary inquiries in Cross Validated chat suggest that they would not find it very on topic. I have also asked a meta question stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5652/… here, which might have a more definitive answer eventually. | |
| May 3, 2019 at 22:39 | comment | added | Stackstuck | Also, if this is off topic, why is this question (rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147221/…) on topic? | |
| May 3, 2019 at 22:31 | comment | added | Stackstuck | Having looked, stats.SE does have a dice tag...that has 113 total questions under it...Compared to our 208 dice questions...Let alone that they also have less dice by volume. We're the experts here whether we like it or not, I think. | |
| May 3, 2019 at 22:29 | comment | added | Stackstuck | Does Cross Validated even have a dice tag? | |
| May 3, 2019 at 21:05 | comment | added | doppelgreener Mod | We can just as likely migrate to Cross Validated. | |
| May 3, 2019 at 19:34 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | @KorvinStarmast sure, even that small change would make it good for RPG.se. But the same thing could be said if many other questions as well. A bunch of friends fighting is not appropriate for us, but put that same question around an RPG table and it is. I think if a querent comes along and wants to know they can ask. We can't keep everything around just because it might possibly be useful in an RPG context eventually right? | |
| May 3, 2019 at 18:51 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | Long ago when I was first DMing, I used some of the OT books to randomly popluate some towns (char names) in my more sandboxy game world. Begatting was a very helpful thing, I guess. | |
| May 3, 2019 at 18:45 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | Do you suggest that we ask the Mods at Christianity.SE for a migration? I can predict that the answer will be "uh, not quite within our scope." All that it takes for that question to be an RPG.SE question is: "I am going to randomly use a psalm to trigger an encounter in an sandboxy RPG session" and it becomes an RPG.SE question. I am not going to go and edit that in, as I am not the querent, but that right there would make it an RPG.SE question. A year from now, someone with that idea stumbles across that question while trying to figure out how to randomize psalms. Cha ching, victory. | |
| May 3, 2019 at 15:48 | history | edited | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 79 characters in body
|
| May 3, 2019 at 14:49 | history | answered | Rubiksmoose | CC BY-SA 4.0 |