One of my ideas for a frontend change, something I’ll probably never bother coding, is a scroll maintainer; when content is being added, it looks at what the current “centered element” is on the page, and attempts to scroll you so that that remains in the exact same spot on the screen.

I don’t know how successful or even practical that might be - and it takes me long enough to set up test codebases for my workplace.

Every once in a while, I run into a small UI issue I might grumble a little about; now I’m wondering if I’d genuinely want to start contributing my frontend dev experience and time to make a few things better.

Granted, I already have end-of-day side projects I don’t put enough time into, so the answer may be No…

And my hacks!

I’m on WinStore version. Do they still have a release delay from the Steam version to mine?

Definitely appreciate the idea of avoiding echo chambers, and not going too hard on policing when someone is simply leaning on some political idea, without actually evoking toxic mentalities.

Something in politics I think people should understand is that some people indoctrinated into harmful ideas CAN sometimes change, but they need space to be able to at least ask questions in an open-minded forum about them.

However, of course, at the same time, there are people harmed by those political ideas. Say, a person is from the X Minority, and a contributor in their space either earnestly or dishonestly keeps asking what’s so bad about the “Ban-Rights-For-All-X-Political-Party”. Giving “question askers” a fully guaranteed space to be able to ask their questions sometimes ruins a community.

Drawing that line on what constitutes a hurtful comment can be hard, and I might argue it should even follow lines of indirection. eg, it’s very obvious that a comment “All X should be murdered” is hurtful to a community. I would actually say that someone expressing “I have interest in the ideas of Mr. Y, I think they’re a very intelligent person”, when Mr. Y is a person who believed that all X should be murdered, should actually be equally moderated. What’s critical to me is whether a community can make moderation actions clear - actually connecting how a statement draws harm, and not just falling back on universal statements like “We don’t talk politics”.