It's easy enough to enable, but... We won't enable it now and probably won't enable it soon on Web Apps. There just isn't enough review traffic to warrant it here.
To elaborate a bit: review audits are most useful on sites that have so much review traffic that it can't be effectively overseen by other users on the site (anyone can see anyone else's reviews ...
No, we should not.
Some sites accept "identify this" questions, but I don't see how that would even be remotely within the scope of this site. This site isn't about videos; it's about web applications. That there are web applications that show videos does not automatically make video content on-topic here.
We don't create tags ahead of time. There needs to be a question that needs the tag before the tag can be created. I only see one question that seems to be about Bandcamp on the whole site, and it's from 2014. I'll wager that the bandcamp tag did exist, but was eventually deleted because it's only on one question. I'll add the tag to that question, but ...
This has come up on Meta Stack Exchange before, and been declined.
Once you get to 2,000 reputation, the thought is that you are now well-versed and trustworthy enough in the workings of the site to be able to edit without having your edits reviewed. Virtually all privileges on Stack Exchange are tied to your reputation score, and the Developers seem ...
Stack Exchange has the concept of a "Historical Lock", where a question and its answers are locked from edits or votes (and obviously no new answers can be added).
What is a historical lock, and what is it used for?
A historical lock preserves older content that was very popular when it was originally posted, but is now off-topic or otherwise out of ...
There is now a chat link on the top menu of every page:
There isn't a a link to create (or use) a specific chat room for a question. The traffic in our general room is probably low enough to discuss it there.
OK so the help center has been updated.
Please note that the following subjects are considered off-topic here:
Web application recommendations
The offtopic close reason has not yet been updated, will do in a bit..
I'm all for this.
I like the idea of being able to recommend something to someone after they've tried something else, but no one ever seemed to follow through with that advice. Even with a decent recommendation question (where they list out their requirements) it would, at best, attract one-line answers (sometimes without even links).
As for the wording in ...
Probably not a good idea.
The software recommendations site is still in beta, and while it looks like it's doing OK, there's no guarantee it'll survive. So while it's probably OK to point people there in comments, it's a little early to make a (semi-)permanent link from our site.
You just need to have at least two different users talking in a room and to not leave a room empty (empty based on messages, not users logged in) for two weeks in order to keep it alive.
It is a minimal requirement really, so just pop in every now and then (but within 14 days) and it should stay open.
Your text entry is expected to be mandatory and supplemental (and in my case it's always has been so) to the sentence stub.
The comment box, on the other hand, is optional and hence the placeholder text to guide. I'm not sure I see the reason why the predefined offtopic comment should be changed to placeholder type?
On Ask Patents they are using tags in a way that I think that doesn't apply to Web Applications. I'm not sure about the arguments on Arqade. According to Jeff Attwood's answer to Should We Zap The Low-Occurrence Tags? the point of the automatic single-use tag removal is to remove tags added by accident and this was set because occurs frequently. I think ...
This has already been asked and discussed at quite some length on Meta already.
Decision on rejected edits should be displayed as a notification to the editor
I understand the desire to educate, but there is something deeply
wrong about the proposed design.
The net effect is the user seeing this broadcast in their face in the
Then you would be breaking the information presented. Currently it's of the format:
action time user reputation
Your proposed would be
action user time reputation
The "action time" pair is as closely related as "user reputation" are.
Putting "time" between user and reputation would then be wrong since time is relative to the action taken, not the ...
As Software Recommendations is still alive one year after question was posted I think that a link to it will be helpful to both sites.
This will be helpful to that site as it could get more traffic and increase it relevance and eventually graduate and will be helpful to Web Applications to eventually reduce off-topics questions.
I agree with making recommendations off-topic here, because Software Recommendations is now doing great (as many questions per day as webapps)
See Software Recommendations's webapp recommendations tag.
Like Vidar said, recommendation questions should be migrated there. It is the most logical thing to do. If there is a rule against such migrations, let's ...
I am against this:
It takes a lot of time to seek a service corresponding to one's need, so to me it makes sense to ask for a recommendation even if we didn't look carefully at a existing solutions.
Often the user's needs can change depending on the existing solutions (e.g. when the user has no idea that such thing existed).
Users' feedback on their ...
It is ludicrous that Google-Fu is subject to being frozen. There is advice all over the place for some matters to "take it to chat" and yet 93,441 users here may not be able to.
At the very least the Help Center might caution "but don't bother to try to if there has been no eligible activity there for two weeks".