Shog9
  • Member for 10 years, 3 months
  • Last seen more than a month ago
awarded
revised

update to rev.6

Loading…
asked
Loading…
awarded
asked
Loading…
comment

@Coelacanth, Lennart, this is exactly what I was talking about - you both wrote reasonable comments disputing or in support of explaining down-votes originally; further discussion has degenerated into speculation and borderline personal comments. Further discussion is unlikely to accomplish anything positive - so end it! FWIW, I recommended that folks avoid attributing votes based on personal observations; until you see the problem yourself, you're unlikely to agree... But my hope is that now when you do see it, you'll be able to recognize it. Trust that you won't be the first one.

comment

@Coelacanth: I think you're ignoring a third way here... Vote according to how accurate and useful you see a post, critique to highlight problems, but don't tie the two together. Vote when you feel confident in your evaluation of a post, and critique when you have something worth saying. If you can do both on a single post, great! If not, so be it.

awarded
answered
Loading…
awarded
awarded
answered
Loading…
comment

The first sentence I wrote.

comment

I did answer it in one sentence - read the first sentence I wrote.

answered
Loading…
comment

Don't forget, @Sid, that you can edit any question - even closed questions - if you think you can make it better.

comment

It has over 2,000 questions, @Wladimir, most with extremely high-quality answers. But it's not really a fair comparison either - that site is public, launched, branded... This one is still trying to get off the ground by tugging furiously at its bootstraps. History is a very broad subject compared to IT security - if this site makes it, it should be considerably larger...

awarded
answered
Loading…
answered
Loading…