Meh, I had the same thoughts about preparatory reading a long time ago. Then I tried to read Kant and quickly changed my mind about that. lol.
Honestly, if you gain a cursory overview of:
Heraclitus, Diogenes, Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, and Schopenhauer–then you should be good to go. It doesn't require an exhaustive study of these thinkers to understand how they relate to one another, which is all you mostly need for knowing what Nietzsche means when he makes a reference to one of them. (and with the exceptions, it's easy enough to just Google whatever thing he's talking about)
I can't recommend the source material enough because no one seems to ever do N justice when talking about him. With that being said, Academy of Ideas has nicely condensed video essays on nearly everyone I mentioned here, and their 2 series on Nietzsche aren't half bad either.
I mainly wanted political filtering to be easily accessible from the main page, especially with that feature being such a strong point of advertising for the platform. Oversaturation of political posts is the #1 complaint I see about reddit, so I think that having the feature front and center would be a good way to entice people into signing up.
I don't mind seeing political posts very much, but I'd like to also be able to easily flip them off to check what's underneath them. This will become more true as the site gains more users, and political events result in transient floods of posts taking up the front page.
After thinking on it some more, it seems that filter toggles would remove some capabilities. Perhaps an additional toggle for "untagged-only" posts would be an easier approach?
That gives me an idea, but I'm not sure if this would come with another host of issues.
There could be two voting systems that operate independently, but carry the appearance of being synchronous. Comments would have an "all" score and a "sub" score. Users who visit the thread from the sub board would see the post with the "all" votes filtered out so that now their [best] sort would be reflective of only votes cast by community members. (only subscribers to that sub would have their votes counted)
Then for visitors from "all", I guess you'd just show them all the votes added together. It wouldn't make sense to separate them in this instance since climbing threads would have tons of comments with only a score of 1.
I think a system like this would also help against brigading, especially if moderators had the ability to set a time requirement for how long someone has be subbed before their vote is given "subscriber" status. Paging /u/Cicero
I'm actually against this change. I think downvotes should inherently be treated as a feature rather than a flaw. It's also misleading to label a board as "all" when it doesn't actually include everything.
I think if a mod doesn't like how their sub is being treated by the greater community, then making the sub private is already an adequate solution.
1 more suggestion: maybe streamline the dialogue prompt for reporting incorrect tags so that you're asked something like "What should this post be tagged as?"
But after making a selection, you're provided with an additional warning/snippet of the relevant content policy. For politics it'd be something like "Does this post reference a candidate, political party, elected or appointed government official, election, referendum, ballot measure, legislation, regulation, directive, or judicial outcome?"
Your definitions for the tags are very clear, but I think a little reminder would go a long way in preventing people from acting on their own subjective interpretations of these terms.
Reported tags should probably just be automatic. Set them after a threshold of a certain number of reports. (set that number to scale with active users?)
In order to circumvent abuse, maybe there could be a symbol after a post gets automatically re-tagged for indicating that it was? Then you'd be able to use that symbol for reporting posts that you believe were incorrectly/maliciously reported so that action can be taken against anyone who abuses the system.
Oh yeah almost forgot, the painted world found in Anor Londo is also considered peak DS level design. Might as well give that one a go too.
DS1 is quite the experience, I would highly recommend giving it a go at least once.
You should finish Anor Londo, but after that, no not really.
>I honestly quite like exploring in this game and learning how the world is all tied together.
This is the main appeal of DS1, and it unfortunately all falls apart at the halfway mark.
I didn't even know it was election day until I saw Cicero's post lol
I wish they'd find a way to inject some rhythm into the choreography of these
I think this is a pretty good idea, just wouldn't want it to apply to comments.
best I can do is 3/10
Meh, I had the same thoughts about preparatory reading a long time ago. Then I tried to read Kant and quickly changed my mind about that. lol.
Honestly, if you gain a cursory overview of:
Heraclitus, Diogenes, Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, and Schopenhauer–then you should be good to go. It doesn't require an exhaustive study of these thinkers to understand how they relate to one another, which is all you mostly need for knowing what Nietzsche means when he makes a reference to one of them. (and with the exceptions, it's easy enough to just Google whatever thing he's talking about)
I can't recommend the source material enough because no one seems to ever do N justice when talking about him. With that being said, Academy of Ideas has nicely condensed video essays on nearly everyone I mentioned here, and their 2 series on Nietzsche aren't half bad either.
I could only get through half of the article, so props to you.
Btw if you ctrl-f for Nietzsche, he's literally only mentioned once at the very beginning. lmfao
Hey you're the one I recommended Nietzsche to on here a while back! How's that been going for you lol
lmao
I mainly wanted political filtering to be easily accessible from the main page, especially with that feature being such a strong point of advertising for the platform. Oversaturation of political posts is the #1 complaint I see about reddit, so I think that having the feature front and center would be a good way to entice people into signing up.
I don't mind seeing political posts very much, but I'd like to also be able to easily flip them off to check what's underneath them. This will become more true as the site gains more users, and political events result in transient floods of posts taking up the front page.
After thinking on it some more, it seems that filter toggles would remove some capabilities. Perhaps an additional toggle for "untagged-only" posts would be an easier approach?
That gives me an idea, but I'm not sure if this would come with another host of issues.
There could be two voting systems that operate independently, but carry the appearance of being synchronous. Comments would have an "all" score and a "sub" score. Users who visit the thread from the sub board would see the post with the "all" votes filtered out so that now their [best] sort would be reflective of only votes cast by community members. (only subscribers to that sub would have their votes counted)
Then for visitors from "all", I guess you'd just show them all the votes added together. It wouldn't make sense to separate them in this instance since climbing threads would have tons of comments with only a score of 1.
I think a system like this would also help against brigading, especially if moderators had the ability to set a time requirement for how long someone has be subbed before their vote is given "subscriber" status. Paging /u/Cicero
The site already has content filters for situations like that
I'm actually against this change. I think downvotes should inherently be treated as a feature rather than a flaw. It's also misleading to label a board as "all" when it doesn't actually include everything.
I think if a mod doesn't like how their sub is being treated by the greater community, then making the sub private is already an adequate solution.
From what I've seen, most people speculate that a decently polished version is only a few months out.
It was only 2 months ago that they first got the game to boot to the title screen, so their progress has been incredibly fast.
1 more suggestion: maybe streamline the dialogue prompt for reporting incorrect tags so that you're asked something like "What should this post be tagged as?"
But after making a selection, you're provided with an additional warning/snippet of the relevant content policy. For politics it'd be something like "Does this post reference a candidate, political party, elected or appointed government official, election, referendum, ballot measure, legislation, regulation, directive, or judicial outcome?"
Your definitions for the tags are very clear, but I think a little reminder would go a long way in preventing people from acting on their own subjective interpretations of these terms.
Reported tags should probably just be automatic. Set them after a threshold of a certain number of reports. (set that number to scale with active users?)
In order to circumvent abuse, maybe there could be a symbol after a post gets automatically re-tagged for indicating that it was? Then you'd be able to use that symbol for reporting posts that you believe were incorrectly/maliciously reported so that action can be taken against anyone who abuses the system.
>LOL haha
my biggest fear was 9/11
Have you ever tried just being really tense?
Nice!