461–470 of 480 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s why I use basecamp - they’re explicit and clear about staying small and profitable enough, with zero ambition for infinite growth.
The company I work use basecamp and I love it! The only thing I wish it had is subcomments like slack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have a bad feeling about this. Discord essentially does one thing really well. I don't want to see it go down the way of so many chat platforms trying to be everything and becoming a bloated mess. IRC does one thing and does it well. Discord is the bloated mess.
> IRC does one thing and does it well. Unfortunately, the one thing that it does well (chat, and nothing else) is supported by a dozen things that it does terribly, and support for them has been hacked on top of the chat features in most places. Bouncers, persistency, rich media (youtube/twitter/image embeds come to mind), mobile accessibility, presence, the ease of channel ownership... these are all things that IRC…
I’ve used discord for a long time and greatly prefer it to slack, teams and Mattermost (the three competitors I’ve used most often). Ironically the only think stopping me from strongly advocating for its adoption in business is that I’m already a user! Much like GitHub and to a lesser extent teams, they seem to not get the idea that I have different personas related to different parts of my life that absolutely shoul…
It's now my first choice chat app, but there's no social features so it's nowhere near a full replacement for Discord.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are so many different varieties of sense of humor. It varies from culture to culture, generation to generation, family to family, and person to person. It's one thing if a joke is actually harmful, of course. But, beyond that, I'd say that denigrating someone else's way of being whimsical is a specific subspecies of taking yourself too seriously.
The person you are responding to did not denigrated anything. He responded to claim that if someone does not like those messages, then he "take himself too seriously". The response simple explained that author find those jokes unfunny. As you said, humor varies from culture to culture, generation to generation, family to family, and person to person. That implies that not liking some kind of humor is completely valid…
I generally think that this advice is over-simplistic, but this tends to be a situation where the, "If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything," principle really is a good rule of thumb.
It's perhaps even worse if you try to make your criticism amusing. Scalzi has a good explanation of why: https://whatever.scalzi.com/2010/06/16/the-failure-state-of-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> capitalism disincentivises companies from serving their customers well, but instead incentivizes gaming the system. If there is a system, people will try to game it. Whether in capitalism or communism or any other system of rules.
Of course. But I'm talking about being rewarded due to inherent rewards associated in the system by gaming it. There is a difference between a system that punishes bad behavior vs. a system that rewards it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The person you are responding to did not denigrated anything. He responded to claim that if someone does not like those messages, then he "take himself too seriously". The response simple explained that author find those jokes unfunny. As you said, humor varies from culture to culture, generation to generation, family to family, and person to person. That implies that not liking some kind of humor is completely valid…
There's a difference, though, between simply not liking some kind of humor, and publicly making fun of it. I generally think that this advice is over-simplistic, but this tends to be a situation where the, "If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything," principle really is a good rule of thumb. It's perhaps even worse if you try to make your criticism amusing. Scalzi has a good explanation of why: https://…
Because what you want here is one sided "one side get to insult the other, but other is expected to not even express their opinion."
Every single Discord-related post here I see comments about the "bad ux". I'm a heavy Discord user and I have no complaints with the UX, I find it pretty intuitive to be honest. I'm also constantly seeing people in shock that people would choose to use Discord over IRC/Matrix/Teamspeak/Mumble. I find Discord to be light years ahead of anything else available, and for an average person who's going to have a hard time…
Tried to ask the Matrix devs about room emotes being broken on Android (though they work on web) and they just ignored me completely. Matrix is simply half baked and somehow barely works so that I keep using it. But they aren't even close to the point where things just work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course. But I'm talking about being rewarded due to inherent rewards associated in the system by gaming it. There is a difference between a system that punishes bad behavior vs. a system that rewards it.
different systems will punish / reward different kinds of bad behaviour so its tit for tat. the only system that could uniformly punish bad behaviour and reward good would be one controlled by a god like being.