Timeline for Shall we at least temporarily ban chatbot-generated content (e.g. ChatGPT) until it becomes clearer what it means for Stack Exchange?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15, 2023 at 0:45 | comment | added | uhoh | @DavidHammen we've had this discussion about voting to leave open before. You continue to confuse what you think should be true with what is. See this answer to What exactly happens with the button "Leave Open" (previously "Do Not Close")? | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 14:50 | comment | added | David Hammen | @uhoh Most governments and religions have laws that forbid certain acts. "Thou shalt not kill": Murder is forbidden; it's a bad thing to do. That is the opposite of glass half full thinking as rules that explicitly spell out what is disallowed means that what is not explicitly forbidden is allowed. Some countries do have laws that explicitly spell out what little behavior is allowed. I for one would not want to live in such a place, or even travel to such places. | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 14:43 | comment | added | David Hammen | @uhoh You still appear to have a bass ackwards view regarding closure votes as you have left multiple comments saying you were voting to keep a question open. That is not an option; you can either vote to close or not vote. There is no "vote to stay open" option. You might want to suggest adding "vote to stay open" as a change to the SE software that would in some manner counteract votes to close. I'm not sure whether I would agree with such a proposal. | |
| Feb 10, 2023 at 12:11 | history | edited | The Rocket fan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Jan 14, 2023 at 1:00 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
|
|
| Jan 3, 2023 at 10:45 | answer | added | David Hammen | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 3, 2023 at 9:46 | answer | added | Dragongeek | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 21, 2022 at 15:45 | answer | added | hobbs | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 19, 2022 at 18:56 | history | edited | Machavity | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Improved formatting
|
| Dec 14, 2022 at 6:02 | comment | added | uhoh | @Topcode that's glass-half-empty thinking | |
| Dec 14, 2022 at 2:54 | comment | added | Topcode | “But where have you seen a community decide to allow it?” By default, if there is no policy on something | |
| Dec 14, 2022 at 0:25 | comment | added | uhoh | @Topcode But where have you seen a community decide to allow it? I don't think that's happened. | |
| Dec 13, 2022 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSpaceExp/status/1602770346863923201 | ||
| Dec 13, 2022 at 18:36 | history | edited | called2voyageMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 13, 2022 at 17:33 | answer | added | Rory AlsopMod | timeline score: 18 | |
| Dec 13, 2022 at 15:05 | comment | added | Topcode | “where exactly are you seeing "allow"?” Allow is the inverse of ban, so if we don’t ban, that’s called allowing. | |
| Dec 13, 2022 at 14:03 | comment | added | uhoh | @Topcode where exactly are you seeing "allow"? Anyway, 1) a lot of folks in the lower question-rate sites don't necessarily see the big debates in the main meta so the links in the question help get the word out, and 2) where exactly is the harm; can you be specific? There are plenty of characteristics, "rules", customs and best practices that vary from site to site. | |
| Dec 13, 2022 at 13:15 | comment | added | Topcode | I think that it’s harmful to have dozens of individual stacks ban or allow chatGPT, rather than having a site wide policy for or against it. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:59 | comment | added | uhoh | this was also posted in Astronomy SE | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:59 | history | edited | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 113 characters in body
|
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:33 | history | asked | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |