So I noticed the entire front page getting clogged with "question" type posts, ranging from "what are your favorite..." to "pls help me choose..." type posts. This might be mainly due to "activity" sorting (sorting by votes is a little better), but that's still the default and doesn't change the general dominance. I took this screenshot earlier and I did not see a non-question post without scrolling. None of them were from ~talk, either.

I know people have different views on this, but I remember from my brief time moderating that it's generally a good idea to restrict these types of posts, for the simple reason that people love to dump their "favorite" lists, which makes these types of threads dominate the frontpage, while they tend to produce always the same responses (intuition might suggest they produce great discussion but that's usually not the case). They're best pushed into specific subreddits (subgroups?).

I think this is a rather small and specific issue, but it might be a taste of future difficulties with voting/moderation. Banning content for being disruptive/abusive is one thing, but the best places I know for discussion also ban via more subtle rule sets. They take measures into account (often at the cost of facing a ton of backlash from users seeing their posts removed for "unfair" reasons) that keep one type of post from taking over the frontpage, potentially drowning out more interesting ones. I'm still trying to picture how this would translate from Reddit's moderation model to Tildes'.

One way would be to open up a subgroup for any sufficiently large category of posts and give moderation the option to move posts to a subgroup that people can opt-out from. Another is very diligent tagging and filtering. My concern is that neither could produce the complex, fine-grain type of moderation that distinguishes really good subreddits (yea, they exist!) from spammy ones. "Hide all posts tagged 'question'" could hide "what's your favorite...?" type posts but also posts that ask a really deep and interesting question. So would you filter "question && favorite"? That turns filtering into almost a scripting job. It doesn't seem reasonable to expect users to put this much effort into content filtering and it wouldn't help "shape" discussion culture, as the default (no filters?) would keep most users jumping from one "favorite game/band/movie/programming language" post to the next.

So far, it seems rules are set site-wide based on mostly removing blatantly off-topic, bad faith or trolling content. As the groups grow, however, I believe it's absolutely vital to also allow more subtle policies (think "only original sources for news articles" or "only direct links to movie trailers", etc). As groups branch off into further subgroups, it might suddenly also be reasonable to have very specific rules like "no more individual posts about hype topic X, keep discussion in the hub thread until Friday".

The only way I can see this work out (and maybe I lack imagination) is via a "meta" section for each group that allows whoever is decided to be part of the moderator group to decide upon and clearly formulate rules specific to it. It could be a wiki-like thing, it could involve voting on changes, maybe automation via "default tag filters", etc. Other users could see the policies mods have decided upon and maybe even "opt out" from moderation actions being considered in filtering, to have no reason to be paranoid about "censored" content.

Am I too pessimistic about tagging/voting solving this on its own? Am I too stuck on doing it "the reddit way" (albeit with hopefully better tools)? I just really believe it's subtle moderation like this that might make or break Tildes in the long run.

TL;DR: How would more subtle or group-specific moderation policies be decided? Just tags+votes? Should there be a "meta" sections for each group where mods can agree upon specific rules?

This movie absolutely destroyed me.

To be fair, I am very affected by the sadness and trauma of others, so it's not surprising that this movie almost killed me. To borrow from a comment I made on another user's post "This movie was a 2 hour long gut punch, and the end was a fever dream." It was so very traumatic, exhausting, uncomfortable, and TERRIFYING. And traditional horror movies do not ever scare me.

My overwhelming feeling for most of the movie was profound sadness. This family torn apart, the horrible things they say and think... the panic attack that Peter has and when he asks his friend to hold his hand? That was one of the times I actually cried. His numb stupor after his sisters head gets knocked off by a telephone pole(!!!!!). His mother's screams when she finds her headless daughter in the back of the car. The desperation when Steve splashes Annie in the face with water. The two times (one reality, one dream) Annie says just awful things to Peter. Peter smashing his face into the desk. Peter screaming/pleading "Mommy!" as Annie tries to get into the attic after him. These are all times I felt overwhelming sadness. Tons of other feelings: anger, disgust, terror, etc. But huge amounts of sadness that I've never felt during other horror movies.

Let me preface this by saying I know what the director has said about his vision and "what the movie really means." But I've never cared about a movie enough to actually fundamentally disagree with the person who created it before. self-deprecating eyeroll

This movie as a straightforward demon-possession/ occult movie does nothing for me. The whole time I had no doubt that it was a family torn apart by mental illness and that devastated and terrified me.

I'm going to post my inexpert interpretation as a comment. It won't be a synopsis, but there will be oodles of spoilers.

*Edit: I thought the movie was great. I don't know if I'll ever see it again.

Since the website has a username and hundreds we were presented with an opportunity to pick a really nice or cool username on a site that I believe will rival reddit.

I just picked my favourite character. I wanted to pick my first name (which I am 100% sure is not taken) but kind of decided to go towards more anonymity. I decided not to use my reddit username because no one else literally uses it so I will always have an option to make a new account with reddit username

Did you think on that too or just used your reddit username?

EDIT: I have actually changed my username from "ironman" to "metal" since i made this post. Now im like super happy and excited about my "identity" here

What do you guys think are the best albums released so far this year? Obviously this is subjective, I'd just like to hear some of your opinions :-)

My favourites out of the ones I can remember are:

• Kids See Ghosts by Kids See Ghosts
• Egg on face. Foot in mouth. Wriggling Wriggling Wriggling. by Crywank
• Moe Moe by Moe Shop
• Little Dark Age by MGMT
• Veteran by JPEGMAFIA

Hey all,
I've been studying Common Lisp recently, and as far as I can see, this is a pretty capable, mature language. Moreover, Lisp has been around since the 60s and it doesn't see much usage (as far as I'm aware) outside of Emacs Lisp and AutoLISP. What gives?

I'm using an Android phone with Chrome 65.0.3325.109 installed.

There's an option in this browser to add a page to the home screen. This creates a shortcut on my home screen. When I tap on that shortcut, it opens the saved page in Chrome.

I had done this with Tildes. However, I deleted the shortcut and made it again. The behaviour has now changed.

Previously, this shortcut opened Tildes as a tab within Chrome. Now, it opens Tildes as its own separate "application". It's not in Chrome. That means I don't get the functionality that comes with Chrome, such as opening a link in a new Chrome tab. In this pseudo-application version, I'm stuck with only one window. I can't open other tabs. I can't simply copy links from one Chrome tab (news website) to another Chrome tab (Tildes).

Did you change something in the past week or so? Can you please change it back? I want a shortcut to a web page to open something that behaves like a web page, not a stand-alone application.

I'm wondering what all the different ways people read here are! Do you always buy a new hardcover, or do you get everything from your library on your e-reader? Feel free to share both format and when/where/what you like to read.

Years ago I was following several electronic music blogs, Missingtoof was a favorite, Panda Toes was another. Then the updates stopped and they disappeared. I don't spend lots of time trying to track down new music, and local radio is a joke at best, so those blogs were a great asset. Not to mention there really isn't an electronic music scene where I live. Any suggestions for music blogs or websites with independent reviews of music?

If I ever trip and fall into a pile of cash I would open a radio station, I would only play unsigned artists and have no advertisements since I had that pile of cash. No top-40 format, no payola, no corporate pressure, just decent music with some human DJs. For now I guess I will just stream stations online and grumble over here in the corner. Speaking of which, anyone know if its possible to start an online radio station cheaper than a physical one?

Got this phishing SMSmessage today. I spun up a VM and investigated the domain provided in the message. Found the provider and reported it to them.

The phishing page is a replica Coinbase login page.

https://imgur.com/a/ZSzNKO7

I have 5 of those in my sidebar, but I don't know anybody who might want to join Tildes.
Assuming invite codes are finite tickets into the platform, is there a way to put them back in the invite codes pool?

Is there a way to do it without the invitations being linked to my profile, considering that I won't be the one choosing the recipients of the invite codes? Or do I just ignore the codes?

Trying to get a sense on how the networking would go down?

If I had one public IP address and say 4 Docker containers on the host, how would the SSH connections work? Would I have to reserve ports for each container?

I just bought this game and I'm in love. The whole Roller Coaster Tycoon nostalgia is at play here, that is for sure, but the level of detail in this game makes my head spin.

I spent a whole evening designing a custom styled burger and drink stand.

Anyone care to share some of the stuff they're been making?

Happy Father's Day!

I thought I will chat a bit about my very favourite cartoon father figure - Iroh from The Last Airbender.

What I find really interesting about this character, and honestly fans can probably write novels about him, is that while he plays a major father figure to the cast, his own son is never really seen on screen and not given much development.

Still, he openly and freely offers his wisdom and help to anyone, whether they are seeking or accepting of it or not. This is not to say that he forces his views on anyone, but is usually the opposite, allowing the kids to weigh and process issues on their own with his guidance, which ends up visibly frustrating for him when it comes to Zuko.

There are lots of examples of him being a good "father”, but most notable for me is his quick forgivess of Zuko.

For all who have seen the series, what do you think? And for those who haven't, you really need to.

So I picked up Jurassic World: Evolution recently because I loved Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis as a kid and have a "dinosaur park sim"-shaped hole in my heart. I'm enjoying it for what it's worth. I think 60 bucks is a little steep for what it's offering, so I can't recommend you pick it up right now unless you REALLY want a Jurassic Park sim game with potential for future growth.

Anyways, that being said, I am 99% convinced this game is just a reskin of the old one. Everything from the dinosaur animations, to the mission types, to the vehicle controls, to how the general flow of gameplay goes feels almost identical to Operation Genesis. I get that there's only so much you can do when you're making what is essentially the same game with from the same property, but take this from a man who put an ungodly amount of time into OG as a child: it feels 100% the same. Like I think all they did was take OG and give the dinosaurs a very nice new paint job and then give everything else a half-hearted coat of paint.

I don't mind all that much since I can't play OG anymore, but I still found it odd how shockingly similar this games feels to OG. Anyone else notice this? Or am I just crazy/supplanting my memories of the old game onto the new one?

Boy howdy. This movie.

I like dinosaurs. A lot. Jurassic Park is probably my favorite movie of all time. So whenever a movie that focuses on dinosaurs comes around, I'll give it a look. I was stocked that the Jurassic franchise was coming back in 2015, and I went on my first date with my girlfriend to see it. So while it wasn't the best movie of all time, it holds a special place in my heart.

That being said, this movie kinda sucks. I managed to find a copy online to check it out, because I was worried about the quality and I don't have money to spend willy nilly, so I figured if I liked what I saw I'd just pay money to see it in a theater later. However, after watching it I can say that unless my girlfriend really wants to see this movie, I don't think I'll fork over the cash to watch it in a theater.

There are good bits to this movie, so I'll start there.

• The dinosaurs look fucking fantastic. Even though I was watching a shitty cam of the movie, I could see the quality, time, and love that went into each creature in this movie and the CGI meshed nearly perfectly with the animatronics that at times it was difficult to tell when one ended and the other began. They are the best they've ever looked.

• The Indoraptor, despite it's stupid name, is fucking cool. It was intimidating and scary, with a solid visual design. It stalked through the third act of the movie with malice and menace.

• Christ Pratt Christ Pratt's his way through this movie. Tons of charm as usual, though even he can't save this train wreck.

• There were a few beautiful shots and fun set pieces, with one shot in particular actually making me a little emotional. You'll know it when you see it.

• Several fun homages to the first film. Nothing special, but the way some parts were shot and framed had me going, "Oh, it was just like that in the first one!"

Now on to the bad:

• This movie has no sense of what it wants to be. Each of the three acts seem to come from entirely different movie ideas. It goes from serious to lighthearted to shockingly dark at the drop of a hat, and there's no real sense of coherence to the plot.

• The villains are cartoon characters and weak and pointless at best, and literally the stupidest mother fuckers on the planet at the worst. You'll know who I'm talking about when you see it.

• The side characters are all pointless and serve more as diversity ticks on some corporate stooges "Focus Group" checklist than as actual characters. Are you ready to see the same "Not Richard Ayoade from the IT crowd" black nerd "hack the mainframe" bit you've seen a hundred times before? How about "tough opinionated alt-chick"? who doesn't take shit and is totally capable? The actors are fine for their parts and I mean no disrespect to them, but their characters feel like such cookie-cutter "side characters" that I just finished the movie and have already forgotten their names.

• Speaking of side characters, the little girl in this movie is actually fine. She's a good actress and much less annoying than the kids in the last movie (and most of the kids in Jurassic Park movies for that matter), but they do something with her that is so baffling and out of nowhere that it just screams, "WE WANTED A TWIST BECAUSE THE KIDS LOVE TWISTS". It has no bearing on the plot at all aside from "justifying" a characters horrible and frankly nearly psychotic decision towards the end of the movie. Again, the young actress does a great job with what little she was given and I feel given a better script she can definitely shine.

Honestly, there's a ton of other little things I could nitpick at this movie for, but those above are definitely the biggest flaws I feel this movie has. You can tell that there as a solid idea behind this movie, but that idea got buried under a mountain of other ideas that were all meshed together into a weird goulash of a movie. This things reeks of "directed by comity".

Overall, there are so many eye-rolling moments in this film, coupled with a weak plot, dialogue, and side characters that even the always charming Chris Pratt and some killer dinosaur effects can't save it.

5/10. If you like dinosaurs and wanna see the best ones you're likely to get for a while, feel free to check your brain out at the door and enjoy at a matinee. Otherwise, don't expect to enjoy this movie if you're hoping for something more than Transformers without the sexism, racism, and dinosaurs instead of robots.

If ya'll have any questions, ask away. I'll try to avoid overt spoilers though, so I'll do my best to answer as vaguely as possible.