pull down to refresh

Was the intent for SN to have zaps to be fully private?

Yes, as far as I’ve always considered it (no nyms attached to zaps).

Then why is there spender rank?

reply
1 sat \ 7 replies \ @ek 25 Jul

You can opt-out, no?

reply

No. You can opt out of having your name displayed. You cannot opt out of being ranked. Those are different things.

Feel free to blame me for this. Not that I coded or designed it. But that I of all stackers have to tell you this. Shame on me.

reply
37 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 25 Jul
You can opt out of having your name displayed. You cannot opt out of being ranked.

Fair point, this should also be possible. I forgot about this.

Feel free to blame me for this. Not that I coded or designed it. But that I of all stackers have to tell you this. Shame on me.

FYI, I can probably show you comments where I supported @siggy47 during MSM. He was trying to hide, but the existing privacy settings made that impossible. I did not agree with all the decisions that were made at SN, which may also have been one of the reasons I left. Is that surprising to you?

reply
Is that surprising to you?

Not at all, but you're very quick to ascribe intent to me. Scream shame on "me, of all stackers"? Yeah bro, that's cool and all, but what do you want? Are you chiding me for not doing a responsible disclosure of something that anyone with primary school knowledge of how ranking works can see? If so then maybe I overestimated everyone's intelligence and I actually am sorry if that is the case. But, you don't get to shame me.

reply
1 sat \ 3 replies \ @ek 25 Jul

I'm sorry for how this conversation went, but when I ask you about a privacy leak and you respond with "what privacy leak?" while seemingly conveniently leaving out relevant details that you later reveal only after I press further, it doesn't look good.

That's what I'm chiding you for.

reply

Keeping at it yes? lol.

seemingly conveniently leaving out relevant details

I didn't know this was an interrogation. Or a disclosure. Are you wearing your popo hat right now? I'm sorry dear overlord ek, that I have inconvenienced you.

What really happened is that I assumed that you:

a) know about what can and cannot be opted out of, and
b) That if rank 1 is hidden and rank 2 is not, that you know the lower bound of rank 1.

Chide away, oh chivalrous SN police, protector of integrity. Except, again, you got it wrong.

reply
180 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 25 Jul

I’m sure this conversation would have gone so much better in person, without all the cascading misunderstandings that are inherent in most written, low-bandwidth online communication.

I think I’m going to take another break from SN.

I hope you guys have fun here without people like me.