1. 14
    1. 5

      to the people marking it as off-topic; why?

      1. 3

        I was curious about that and went poking around at high-voted stuff that came up when searching for off-topic. It seems it’s not unusual to see a few off-topic flags.

      2. 2

        It’s a post containing technology, but not really about computing or technology

        1. 8

          It’s about how to effectively use technology. And I think a good reminder of what technology is for. In this case making our lives easier. And even though you might be tempted to go “duh” at this:

          Technology exists to make things easier, not to be paperwork but less flexible. Indeed, when it truly makes operations easier and become invisible, everyone involved can benefit.

          Sounds obvious, right? Well, not to the people who build some of the heavy systems I’ve worked at over the years apparently. Too often we’re still ignoring what computers can really do, and insist of putting them in the middle of familiar processes, often making the process overly rigid instead of just speeding up the dumb part, or rethinking the entire process in the light of what computers can do that humans can’t.

          It was worth my time as a technologist.

        2. 6

          It’s entirely about the technology behind the registration system at this convention.

          1. 7

            The content of the post is like a series of journal logs about the ops of getting their chosen technology working, not meaningfully about the technology. Example:

            Then, I ordered the cheapest 2D code scanners on Amazon. They came with incompatible cords. With effort, I forced them to be compatible with the cords provided and ordered some more scanners to test with, including orb looking ones.

            Okay, cool?.. Why were the cords incompatible, how did one “force” them to become compatible? What are “orb looking” scanners? It’s followed by two tweets about a PCB with pictures of what might be an incompatible cable made compatible… The article is just that pattern, “I used X to do Z thing” but no meaty why or how. If this was posted on “Lobsters for Operations” or “Lobsters for Risk Management” I wouldn’t have voted it off-topic

            1. 1

              If this was posted on “Lobsters for Operations” or “Lobsters for Risk Management” I wouldn’t have voted it off-topic

              See, that’s useful feedback. “Off-topic” is vague. This answers “Off-topic for Lobsters, or off-topic for the tags?”

              I don’t see a way to add or change tags.

              1. 2

                The “suggest” page provides ways to adjust tags based on some mechanism I don’t understand.

              2. 1

                Users can suggest tags.

          2. 6

            The format of the post does not make that clear at all. At first glance it looks like a social media account of attending a con.

            1. 2

              The title is a big tell, I think. There’s also a little chat bubble thing directly below the title on the page that makes it clear it’s about technology.

              It’s an uncommon format, but not the only blog with it that makes repeat appearances on here. It’s a natural evolution on writing a blog post in a casual, conversational style. All three I can think of (including this) are furries or furry-adjcent, so those conversations naturally involve a lot of stickers.

    2. 2

      This is super neat and impressive! I love any work that helps to dismantle LineCon™. Now if only you could make hotel elevators more reliable.