I don’t usually share what I build. Most of it lives on Codeberg or Github as a glorified off-site backup. 3-2-1 and all that. If I nuke my drive, I can pull it back down. That’s the whole point for me.

A while back I mentioned Pimaps here, a few people asked to see it, so I posted it. Got dunked on for AI slop despite explicitly marking which parts were AI-assisted (documentation and review- flagged with AIP). Similar story with Cliparr. I get it - Lemmy hates AI in any capacity.

What does the community actually expect from devs when sharing a project? I’m not assuming everyone here is a professional dev - though I’d guess the overlap is significant - so I’m wondering where the bar sits.

Polish? Full handwritten codebase? Something else?

How much of the sausage making do you actually want to see?

  • Err(()).unwrap()@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    you’re conflating me with the author of Cliparr

    My mistake, I’ve edited the comment to reflect this. Although I don’t understand, then, why you even brought Cliparr up. You’re not involved, and only taking offence on someone else’s behalf.

    That also means that the lovely message of “Ipso facto, for all the AI “Akshually” pedants, I’ve tagged this as AIP. Politely go fuck yourselves :)” was precipitated by a single negative interaction and a handful of downvotes. Regardless of linguistic and cultural differences, that’s just being a dick, and it should be pointed out. Perhaps you should reexamine how you handle criticism.

    • SuspiciousCarrot78@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      I brought up Cliparr because someone was being pre-emptively called a slop merchant before anyone had looked at their code. You don’t have to be personally involved to think that’s worth pushing back on.

      On the catalyst: you’ve characterised it as “a single negative interaction and a handful of downvotes.” You’ve also already acknowledged you missed the deleted posts. Those two things are doing quite a bit of work together. The comment that preceded the edit wasn’t a downvote - it was being told I was “fluent in slop”, and that my app might kill someone, directed at someone who is autistic. That’s the interaction we’re talking about.

      I’ll take the broader point that the phrasing was undiplomatic. But “perhaps you should reexamine how you handle criticism” is a bit rich from someone who’s called me a twat twice and is now on their third comment about it.