If a top-level comment is collapsed by default (presumably due to "noise" tags), replies to that comment will still trigger the "1 new" text on the topic, but won't be visible when you visit the thread - and there's not even any indication that you should expand the noise-tagged comment to see a reply.

Would it be possible(/desirable) to show the red indicator next to collapsed comments if there's a new comment underneath them?

IDK if this is just me, but, in some cases, the dotted lines are not enough. I become easily lost, and have to "manually" retrace the discussion.

I'd like to suggest for Tildes to use even more colors on these lines, kinda like color-schemes do for Org Mode on Emacs.

I could go even further and suggest a major "Org-Modization" of Tildes: IMHO, Org Mode has nailed this kind of structure. I know it's a bold suggestion, but there it is! ;)

Cheers!

This topic is part of a weekly series. It is meant to be a place for users to discuss their weekend.

If you have any plans, things you want to get done, things you have done, things you haven't done, or even if you just want to talk about how you're doing this weekend, this is a place for casual discussion about those things.

A list of all previous topics in this series can be found here.

So, what (or how) are you doing this weekend?

I wasn't sure if there had been some changes lately or if it was my head, but I thought there used to be a politics group within Tildes. Regardless, it seems that I've noticed a culpible decline in the number of posts that are related to politics and especially US politics. I also noticed that it seems that some more prominent users got banned or left? Obviously I can understand if the people here were tired of hearing about it and wanted to give other groups some more room for the front page, but I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a fluke or my imagination. I don't come here as often as I should, but it just seemed a little different. Hopefully this doesn't spark any massive outcry or anger or anything, I'm just out of the loop, and don't want to cause any trouble. I like this place. I like you all.

Edit: Wow this seems to have really gotten out of control and spread to discussions about moderation logs and how much we should pay attention to US politics in relation to world politics or even how much we should catastrophize over recent political developments. I almost feel like I shouldn't have brought this up and I apologize. I really didn't intend on causing any ire for those in charge or for massive debates.

Article: https://thetyee.ca/News/2019/04/25/First-Past-The-Post-Civil-Rights-Issue/ (April 2019)

Press release (October 9th, 2019) about the court filing: Court challenge against Canada’s unfair voting system to be filed today

Tweet confirming the filing: https://twitter.com/Challenge4FV/status/1181992387394113536

(Sorry about the weird format but I couldn't find a recent news article and I wanted to provide more info than just the press release.)

A "hidden gem" is a game that is considered to be great but not well-known at all. It's something you believe deserves far more recognition and reach than it currently has. A diamond in the rough.

Though a hidden gem certainly can be a highly polished experience, the term also allows a bit of roughness, leaving room for clunkiness or flaws on account of the game's scope and production values (hidden gems are rarely, if ever, big-budget). It also seems to place a slight premium on novelty and innovation, favoring but not requiring games to be fresh or experimental for their time.

With this in mind, I'm curious to hear people's opinions and hopefully get some new stuff to check out for when I find myself needing to take a break from Crash and Spyro.

• What games would you consider "hidden gems"?
• Why do you feel they fit the criteria?
• Why do you think they aren't more widely known?

I just found out about this and it's something I guess I should have known about before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Smithee

Alan Smithee (also Allen Smithee) is an official pseudonym used by film directors who wish to disown a project. Coined in 1968 and used until it was formally discontinued in 2000,[1] it was the sole pseudonym used by members of the Directors Guild of America (DGA) when a director, dissatisfied with the final product, proved to the satisfaction of a guild panel that he or she had not been able to exercise creative control over a film. The director was also required by guild rules not to discuss the circumstances leading to the movie or even to acknowledge being the project's director.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000647/