[Question] how do you actually verify wiki
how do you actually verify wiki — that is what I am asking, and I have already read the wiki twice.
Sorted by controversial for a week and found four of the best threads I have read here.
Edited a wiki page for the first time and nothing bad happened, which is apparently the point.
Complained about a rule without proposing anything and was politely pointed at this page. Fair.
That is everything I have. The rest is opinion and I have tried to keep it out.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Moderation of individual cases happens in modmail rather than in threads, because a public discussion of one person’s removal is worse for that person than a private one.
The evidence standard on the vendor boards requires a document, a date or a named service behind any claim about a supplier. It is what makes those threads worth reading years later.
The evidence standard on the vendor boards requires a document, a date or a named service behind any claim about a supplier.
Agreed — concrete wording or it is not a proposal.
Submissions older than a year are archived: readable, linkable, and closed to new comments. That keeps a three-year-old thread from being reopened with a reply nobody will see in context.
Feed position is a function of early votes and time. That structurally favours agreeable early answers over correct late ones, which is why sorting by controversial occasionally is worth the effort.
Same view — strict evidence rules make this board slower and make the archive worth reading in three years.
ranked feeds mean the top comment is not the best answer
Who does this help, and who does it cost?
Who does this help, and who does it cost?
RetaAndRegret2 is right that the strict evidence rule is the asset, not the friction.
What would the new rule do to the vendor evidence standard?
Push back: the ranking is not hiding anything. The formula is published and you can reproduce the ordering.
modmail first, always, and the thread second
modmail first, always, and the thread second
This is the principle the whole site is built on. Publish it or do not enforce it.
This is the principle the whole site is built on.
Adding the practical note — the formula is published and you can reproduce the ordering yourself.
Have you read the published formula, genuinely asking?
Right, and the storefront links on source pages are marked and disclosed, which is the honest way to do it.
Reminder that no referral or affiliate links are permitted anywhere, from anybody, ever.
Argued against the strict evidence rule for a year. Then read a supplier thread on another site and stopped arguing.
rule-change proposals need a concrete wording, not a complaint
vendor source pages link storefronts and the link is marked
- 1Feed position is a function of early votes and time. That structurally…11 comments in this branch · started by u/vikram_mbeki