Search

Ideas that are…

Search Ideas


3002 ideas match your query.:

The purpose of the law isn’t to minimise negatives and maximise positives. The purpose of the law is to uphold the rights of people.

#4138·Benjamin DaviesOP, 6 days ago·Criticism

Drugs are a net negative for society.

#4137·Benjamin DaviesOP, 6 days ago·CriticismCriticized1

This is speculation, see #4106. If it really becomes an issue, I can retire the feature or improve it.

#4136·Dennis HackethalOP, 6 days ago·Criticism

I plan to go piecemeal by starting with reactions to ideas as a whole, then maybe to paragraphs/block-level elements down the line.

#4135·Dennis HackethalOP, 6 days ago·Criticism

Would this work better as a criticism of #4058? That way, the relationship between these ideas might be clearer, and there’d be the possibility of a criticism chain.

#4134·Dennis Hackethal, 6 days ago·Criticism

Related to #4062, making any part of the drug trade illegal just gives gangs and cartels a leg up over law-abiding citizens.

#4133·Dennis Hackethal, 6 days ago·Criticism

But that way, you pretty much ensure that only scumbags sell drugs. And they definitely don’t care about their customers.

#4132·Dennis Hackethal, 6 days ago·Criticism

Getting someone hooked on an addictive substance to get repeat business is predatory. It’s not an honest way to do business. Even if consuming drugs was legal, maybe the selling of drugs should still be illegal.

#4131·Dennis Hackethal, 6 days ago·CriticismCriticized2

Agreed. Thanks.

#4130·Tyler MillsOP, 7 days ago

‘Board’

#4129·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·Criticism

Need ‘standing’ bounties: they don’t expire. I keep finding myself wanting a standing bounty for #3069 so I don’t have to re-run expiring bounties.

#4128·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·Criticism

Feature idea: pay people to criticize an idea.

You start a ‘bounty’ of an arbitrary amount (min. USD 5), which is prorated among eligible critics after some deadline.

There could then be a page for bounties at /bounties. And a page listing a user’s bounties at /:username/bounties.

When starting a bounty, the user writes terms for the kinds of criticism they want. This way, they avoid having to pay people pointing out typos or other unwanted criticisms.

Anyone can start a bounty on any idea. There can only be one bounty per idea at a time.

To ensure a criticism is worthy of the bounty, the initiator gets a grace period of 24 hours at the end to review pending criticisms. Inaction automatically awards the bounty to all pending criticisms at the end of the grace period.

#4126·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #2442·CriticismCriticized1

Veritula should have some way to acknowledge an idea, including a way to show that a thread is resolved, at least for the time being, without having to comment.

#4124·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #2156·CriticismCriticized1Archived

Veritula should have some way to acknowledge an idea, including a way to show that a thread is resolved, at least for the time being, without having to comment.

#4122·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #2156·CriticismCriticized1Archived

Veritula should have some way to acknowledge an idea, including a way to show that a thread is resolved, at least for the time being.

#4120·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #2156·CriticismCriticized1Archived

Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.

Maybe it does. Any kind of reaction is a response that turns a criticism from unacknowledged to acknowledged.

#4118·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #4102·Criticism

The purpose of the reaction would be to record a kind of agreement or acknowledgment.

That way, Veritula could show unacknowledged criticisms to users. So in addition to revising or counter-criticizing, they get a chance to acknowledge a criticism without having to comment.

Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.

#4116·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #2892·CriticismCriticized1

Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.

Maybe it does. Any kind of reaction is a response that turns a criticism from ‘pending’1 to not ‘pending’ anymore.


  1. ‘Acknowledged’ vs ‘unacknowledged’ may be better terminology here, to avoid overlap with the current notion of pending criticisms.

#4114·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #4102·CriticismCriticized1

Edit: …

Pointing out changes is discouraged. Version history and diffing take care of that for you.

#4113·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·Criticism

I think the reason the limited set works well in X spaces is that there’s no text input. So there’s no way to sidestep the restriction.

For Veritula, it would be more like an emoji restriction on tweets. That wouldn’t work because you couldn’t stop people from posting arbitrary emojis in tweets by just typing them with their keyboards.

#4112·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·Criticism

This seems both complicated and restrictive. People could easily sidestep the restriction anyway: nothing stops someone from leaving a comment with only a single emoji in it.

#4110·Dennis HackethalOP revised 7 days ago·Original #4105·Criticism

Too complicated/ambitious for a first implementation. Start piecemeal. But could be a promising approach if reactions to ideas as a whole end up being ambiguous (#2166).

#4109·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·Criticism

Doesn’t need to be arbitrary emojis, it could just be a handful that you choose, each being a different flavour of acknowledgement.

Thumbs up,
Thinking emoji,
Mind-blown emoji,
Etc.

Edit: X spaces are an example of a limited set of emojis working well.

#4107·Benjamin Davies revised 7 days ago·Original #4104·CriticismCriticized2

I can speculate ahead of time, but I might implement reactions and find that this is not an issue after all. And if it is, I can either retire the feature or improve it.

#4106·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·Criticism

This seems both complicated and restrictive.

#4105·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago·CriticismCriticized1