XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works

Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works by randomdata on Monday October 17, 2022 @09:11AM (#33232978)

Short of writing a novel, what would be more clear than the clear indication that it is Not Safe For Weaklings? If you don't think you're strong enough to handle it, don't venture in. Seems pretty straightforward.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works by catiopatio on Monday October 17, 2022 @09:46PM (#33242029)

NSFL. Or, perhaps we need a “4chan and similarly tasteless degenerates” tag.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works by randomdata on Monday October 17, 2022 @10:26PM (#33242262)

> NSFL

Not Safe For the Limp is just variant of Not Safe for the Weak. They both communicate that if you aren't strong, stay away.

> Or, perhaps we need a “4chan and similarly tasteless degenerates” tag.

It's just an arbitrary grid of pixels. Either you are strong enough to handle viewing arrangements of pixels or you aren't. The weak have been warned, the strong have no concerns. No need to overcomplicating things.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works by catiopatio on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @12:51AM (#33243098)

That probably sounded a lot better in your head.

[ Parent | on HN ]