Forum Upgrades, New Rules, and More

pjk said:
What do you mean exactly here? Which forum competitions exactly if not the weekly ones?


Done


Great points. I've removed rolling eyes and confused, and added heart now.
Click to expand...
I feel like the fire emoji 🔥 might be a great addition to reaction column like say for example someone breaks a world record or gets a pr and they post here is a message post or thread. Maybe even the party emoji as well 🥳
 
Last edited:
xyzzy said:
Pretty sure this is talking about the newly added timer (which doesn't use TNoodle), not the forum weekly comp scrambles (which does use TNoodle, which pads scrambles to 11 moves).
Click to expand...
Ah, thank you. I was away from home and it wasn't convenient to check. That makes sense, thank you!

I would imagine pjk can modify the timer to use TNoodle scrambles eventually.
 
THE_V01DL0RD said:
Since there's no confused emoji, I am going to respond in a polite and kind way about what I personally find confusing about this message:

wdym?
Click to expand...
Like this thing

IMG_0318.webp
 
Hazel said:
I've said this before, but I've never been a fan of a couple of the (relatively) more recent emoji reactions - meh, rolling eyes, and (to a lesser extent) confused.
Click to expand...
Aight cool
Your personal opinion so I can't really say much bout this
Hazel said:
They are only ever used negatively, as a subtle way of saying "this post is dumb and you should feel dumb". In a forum meant to be friendly and positive, I'm not sure these make sense to keep around.
Click to expand...
🤨
This is just blatantly untrue.

If you're advocating for the removal of negative reactions, I'm not sure why you're not talking about the anger reaction cuz, last I checked, anger isn't rlly positive.
And confusion isn't negative at all. It can show that something is worded weird or something needs more explaining or context. Never rlly told me "you're dumb and should be ashamed of yourself cuz I'm confused". I can kinda understand the case for meh and rolling eyes, but I'm not sure if confused fits into the same category. If anything, anger and sadness should be removed instead of confused cuz they're negative, right?

Generalizing your personal feelings about something to an entire population isn't really a reliable argument and only shows your perspective and interpretation rather than inquiring on other peoples thoughts and opinions on the matter.

Come on dude I learned about🙄

I feel like some more discussion about this should've been had before pjk took action.
Hazel said:
The simple thumbs-down emoji is usually good enough as a simple disagreeing statement, and if more needs to be said, a reply post can be made.
Click to expand...
While I do agree that if more needs to be said about something, you should say something(see something, say something), I'm not sure that a simple thumbs down could encompass all negative emotion or disagreement. Emojis such as confused and meh show a specific kind of dissatisfaction with a message or post that you could respond to and maybe possibly learn from. A simple thumbs down doesn't rlly give you much room to improve and somewhat complicates things somewhat for the person who, let's say disagrees with a statement, or doesn't understand the wording of something.

It is 100% possible to have a positive and welcoming community while at the same time showing disagreements in views or dissatisfaction with a post. Removing all emojis that could have a negative connotation seems kind childish and sensitive. I understand a lot of people here are kids, but I feel like most of us are mature enough to realize that a "😒" is nothing to cry over.

Hazel said:
I would advocate for the removal of these. For the sake of keeping history, perhaps removing them from the list of available reaction options, without having them removed from existing posts.
Click to expand...
I would advocate for the revival of these
Or you could bring back the confused and meh cuz the meh makes the eye roll emoji kinda redundant because they both show the same reaction.

Hazel said:
I would also *love* a simple heart emoji to react with, both in an effort to encourage positivity, and because the heart-eyes emoji has a slightly different connotation to me.
Click to expand...
Honestly idrc bout this one so I don't got nothing to say. However, personal opinion shouldn't be used in a persuasive argument unless you got good evidence to back it up(yet again...)

xyzzy said:
Pretty sure this is talking about the newly added timer (which doesn't use TNoodle), not the forum weekly comp scrambles (which does use TNoodle, which pads scrambles to 11 moves).
Click to expand...
yea the new timer
0.79 is pb2


Edit: I ain't good at writing essays y'all and I prolly contradicted myself somewhere, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
Mike Hughey said:
I am using a version of the TNoodle scrambler. It is perhaps a bit old, but I don't think the 2x2x2 scrambler has changed recently. The WCA regulations require that:
4b3b) 2x2x2 Cube: The (random) state must require at least 4 moves to solve.
I am not seeing anything in the regulations that require that the scramble be obfuscated, because that's not important when scrambles are applied by a staff member instead of the competitor. Hence, I suspect this is a totally legitimate WCA scramble.

I suppose I could try to write a new scrambler to obfuscate, to deal with the fact that the scrambles are applied by the competitor, but that may require quite a bit of work to make sure that it's valid, and it takes away from the current status of using WCA-compliant scrambles. Should I really be building a separate scrambler from tnoodle for this? Is 2x2x2 the only one that needs this? For instance, I would think Pyraminx might also need it, since some of the 6 minimum moves could be tips.

Perhaps a compromise would be to have TNoodle generate the scrambles, then run those scrambles through a separate obfuscator program to yield a minimum number of moves while maintaining the random state. That will introduce the possibility of bugs, though.
Click to expand...
See, you could try to obfuscate it and write a algoithm and blah blah blah complicated math computer stuff

or you could get the new version of TNoodle...
 
THE_V01DL0RD said:
Aight cool
Your personal opinion so I can't really say much bout this

🤨
This is just blatantly untrue.

If you're advocating for the removal of negative reactions, I'm not sure why you're not talking about the anger reaction cuz, last I checked, anger isn't rlly positive.
And confusion isn't negative at all. It can show that something is worded weird or something needs more explaining or context. Never rlly told me "you're dumb and should be ashamed of yourself cuz I'm confused". I can kinda understand the case for meh and rolling eyes, but I'm not sure if confused fits into the same category. If anything, anger and sadness should be removed instead of confused cuz they're negative, right?

Generalizing your personal feelings about something to an entire population isn't really a reliable consensus and only shows your perspective and interpretation rather than inquiring on other peoples thoughts on the matter. I feel like some more discussion about this should've been had before the Big Mike took action.

Come on dude it's basic statistics🙄


While I do agree that if more needs to be said about something, you should say something(see something, say something), I'm not sure that a simple thumbs down could encompass all negative emotion or disagreement. Emojis such as confused and meh show a specific kind of dissatisfaction with a message or post that you could respond to and maybe possibly learn from. A simple thumbs down doesn't rlly give you much room to improve and somewhat complicates things somewhat for the person who, let's say disagrees with a statement, or doesn't understand the wording of something.

I believe it's possible to have a positive and welcoming community while at the same time showing disagreements in views or dissatisfaction with a post. Removing all emojis that could have a negative connotation seems kind childish and sensitive to me tbh. I understand a lot of people here are kids, but I feel like most of us are mature enough to realize that a "😒" is nothing to cry over.


I would advocate for the revival of these
Or you could bring back the confused and meh cuz the meh makes the eye roll emoji kinda redundant if you ask me.


Honestly idrc bout this one so I don't got nothing to say. However, personal opinion shouldn't be used in a persuasive argument(yet again...)


yea the new timer
0.79 is pb2
Click to expand...
You have some good points here, and a couple that I disagree with. As a TL;DR, I feel firm in my opinions, but I do definitely agree that my individual opinion should not be the end-all-be-all and this discussion should be moved into its own thread (which I have created! link here).

Regarding the frowny face and angry emojis, the honest answer is I forgot about them when I typed up my suggestion. You are right that anger is a negative reaction—I would likely lump them in with the others I mentioned. As for confusion not being necessarily negative, I definitely agree (and as Jared has mentioned, a question mark emoji reaction would be a neat idea); the problem, though, is how these reactions were used. From what I have seen, that emote, alongside "meh" and "rolling eyes", were most often used as a mild form of insult—and while I agree they're nothing to cry over, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're constructive to the site. Negative emotions will always naturally arise, but in my opinion, we shouldn't give the tools to make spreading them easier.

This all is just my opinion, as you mentioned—and if I'm the odd one out, then I'm willing to be overruled. I also think you're right that the question of what reactions to include as options should be its own discussion with more sources of input than just me. I have linked the new thread for this topic above, we should all move the discussion there!

Hope this clarifies my feelings on the topic, I appreciate you pushing back.
 
Mike Hughey said:
I am using a version of the TNoodle scrambler. It is perhaps a bit old, but I don't think the 2x2x2 scrambler has changed recently. The WCA regulations require that:
4b3b) 2x2x2 Cube: The (random) state must require at least 4 moves to solve.
I am not seeing anything in the regulations that require that the scramble be obfuscated, because that's not important when scrambles are applied by a staff member instead of the competitor. Hence, I suspect this is a totally legitimate WCA scramble.

I suppose I could try to write a new scrambler to obfuscate, to deal with the fact that the scrambles are applied by the competitor, but that may require quite a bit of work to make sure that it's valid, and it takes away from the current status of using WCA-compliant scrambles. Should I really be building a separate scrambler from tnoodle for this? Is 2x2x2 the only one that needs this? For instance, I would think Pyraminx might also need it, since some of the 6 minimum moves could be tips.

Perhaps a compromise would be to have TNoodle generate the scrambles, then run those scrambles through a separate obfuscator program to yield a minimum number of moves while maintaining the random state. That will introduce the possibility of bugs, though.
Click to expand...
I actually created a proposal for such a scramble obfuscator that still guarantees uniform random state scramble, but the entire scramble length distribution shifts by 6 or 7:
Renslay

Thread '2x2 Scrambler Obfuscator'

This is my proposal how to obfuscate a 2x2 scrambling sequence. By that, I mean, if the scramble is extremely short (for example, 4 moves), a solution is immediate for the scrambler. This is not a problem in a competition where you cannot see the scrambling sequence, but when you practice at home, it can be a problem: if the scrambling sequence is too short, a solution is immediate even for the untrained eyes.

So, how to make the scrambling sequence long, while we still maintain that every cube state has an equal chance to appear?
Easy: we still pick a random state, but we artificially...
  • Heart
  • Like

The method can be extended to other puzzles as well.
 
Now that we've had progression threads showing up on the main page for a couple days, I think it's a good time to re-evaluate whether they should stay there or not.
I bring this up because personally, I'm not a fan. I have nothing against these threads existing, but they take up on average a quarter of the main-page posts, and earlier today I saw the percentage go as high as 50%. I believe that one of three things should happen:

1) Cubing progression threads should be hidden from the main page, like before.
2) A system for muting sub-forums should be introduced, so users can decide for themselves whether they want threads like these showing up. Would also be neat if we could mute a sub-forum while still choosing to Watch the specific users' threads we're interested in getting updates for.
3) Same as #2, but muting the cubing progression sub-forum by default so that new users don't see them unless they opt-in.

My vote would go toward either 2 or 3, with a bias toward 3. Just not a fan of the current system, where a huge percentage of the main-page posts are progression threads. What does everybody else think?
 
Hazel said:
Now that we've had progression threads showing up on the main page for a couple days, I think it's a good time to re-evaluate whether they should stay there or not.
I bring this up because personally, I'm not a fan. I have nothing against these threads existing, but they take up on average a quarter of the main-page posts, and earlier today I saw the percentage go as high as 50%. I believe that one of three things should happen:

1) Cubing progression threads should be hidden from the main page, like before.
2) A system for muting sub-forums should be introduced, so users can decide for themselves whether they want threads like these showing up. Would also be neat if we could mute a sub-forum while still choosing to Watch the specific users' threads we're interested in getting updates for.
3) Same as #2, but muting the cubing progression sub-forum by default so that new users don't see them unless they opt-in.

My vote would go toward either 2 or 3, with a bias toward 3. Just not a fan of the current system, where a huge percentage of the main-page posts are progression threads. What does everybody else think?
Click to expand...
3
 
Hazel said:
Now that we've had progression threads showing up on the main page for a couple days, I think it's a good time to re-evaluate whether they should stay there or not.
I bring this up because personally, I'm not a fan. I have nothing against these threads existing, but they take up on average a quarter of the main-page posts, and earlier today I saw the percentage go as high as 50%. I believe that one of three things should happen:

1) Cubing progression threads should be hidden from the main page, like before.
2) A system for muting sub-forums should be introduced, so users can decide for themselves whether they want threads like these showing up. Would also be neat if we could mute a sub-forum while still choosing to Watch the specific users' threads we're interested in getting updates for.
3) Same as #2, but muting the cubing progression sub-forum by default so that new users don't see them unless they opt-in.

My vote would go toward either 2 or 3, with a bias toward 3. Just not a fan of the current system, where a huge percentage of the main-page posts are progression threads. What does everybody else think?
Click to expand...
I litterary thought these weren't allowed, and I've seen alott of old posts talking about them filling the forums. I think 2 or 3 would fix it.
 
Hazel said:
Now that we've had progression threads showing up on the main page for a couple days, I think it's a good time to re-evaluate whether they should stay there or not.
I bring this up because personally, I'm not a fan. I have nothing against these threads existing, but they take up on average a quarter of the main-page posts, and earlier today I saw the percentage go as high as 50%. I believe that one of three things should happen:

1) Cubing progression threads should be hidden from the main page, like before.
2) A system for muting sub-forums should be introduced, so users can decide for themselves whether they want threads like these showing up. Would also be neat if we could mute a sub-forum while still choosing to Watch the specific users' threads we're interested in getting updates for.
3) Same as #2, but muting the cubing progression sub-forum by default so that new users don't see them unless they opt-in.

My vote would go toward either 2 or 3, with a bias toward 3. Just not a fan of the current system, where a huge percentage of the main-page posts are progression threads. What does everybody else think?
Click to expand...
3
 
Hazel said:
Now that we've had progression threads showing up on the main page for a couple days, I think it's a good time to re-evaluate whether they should stay there or not.
I bring this up because personally, I'm not a fan. I have nothing against these threads existing, but they take up on average a quarter of the main-page posts, and earlier today I saw the percentage go as high as 50%. I believe that one of three things should happen:

1) Cubing progression threads should be hidden from the main page, like before.
2) A system for muting sub-forums should be introduced, so users can decide for themselves whether they want threads like these showing up. Would also be neat if we could mute a sub-forum while still choosing to Watch the specific users' threads we're interested in getting updates for.
3) Same as #2, but muting the cubing progression sub-forum by default so that new users don't see them unless they opt-in.

My vote would go toward either 2 or 3, with a bias toward 3. Just not a fan of the current system, where a huge percentage of the main-page posts are progression threads. What does everybody else think?
Click to expand...
definitely 3
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top