According to Meta SO:
How do we handle questions that are potentially or blatantly illegal
Your question here is not materially different than the click-fraud
one, and the answer is essentially the same: close if it's crap, or if
it clearly intends to harm someone else. Questions that clearly seek
to defraud or otherwise harm ...
Middle clicking on a link opens it in a new tab. No need to make it happen for everybody.
The use of _blank to open links in a new window or tab has been discussed on the user experience StackExchange site. The consensus there appears to be that it shouldn't be used.
We can't add two more off-topic close reason because we are limited to three. We just combined two of our reasons "software recommendations" and "3rd party resources", so we have only one slot available. I believe that John Conde has a proposal that he wants to make for the currently empty slot.
As for your specific recommendations, my opinions are:
Arguably because the division produces a "shelf" for the tabs to sit on rather than just floating in the air with no clear relation to anything; the line also creates an overall container for the header content versus question list/sidebar below. In fact, the point at which you decided to fade the gradient out actually tends to end up associating the tabs ...
Although tags already exist for development and web-development, these would seem to be more concerned with the development process than conducting demonstrations for others, as you noted.
I think there could be questions asking about strategies and techniques on how to demonstrate to others: website designs & layouts, modifications & improvements, ...
I created the GDPR tag, added Wiki content for it, and added the tag to your related question: GDPR compliant contact form.
This new regulation covers Personal Data for all individuals within the European Union (EU):
Personal data is any information relating to an individual, whether it
relates to his or her private, professional or public life. It ...
This is done, however - there's no default style. You'll need to specify as you use it. We've also enabled this on the Unix related sites, Super User, etc - where questions sometimes have a smidgen of code that has to be shown.
Active both on the main site and on meta (for questions about formatting). Note, code related questions are off-topic, but ...
It should be up to the user how a new tab opens, and having a consistent default to the same is really the only way to do that. If we create links with an alternate target, then users won't be able to open links in the same window, if that's what they want.
However, they can easily middle-click, or right-click and select the destination that they want with ...
Hopefully I can provide insight into why your questions were closed (and, in any case, meta is the best place to discuss - thank you for bringing this discussion to meta).
Will only generate discussion if the person answering unsure own answer.
Your question stated "Why are they doing this[?]" which invites speculation. This wording is ...
Having a standardized guideline for editing is helpful, however the following things should be considered:
As covered in the Help Center's FAQ on Edit Questions And Answers, edits should attempt to:
make the post substantively better when you edit, not just change a single character. Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged.
So instead of editing the ...
This has come up time and time again on quite a few of our sites, and it's just not something that works well in connection with our main sites, which are designed to have an extremely high signal to noise ratio. The concern is these 'annex' sites (or attics, archives, and other neat words for such collections) would become a sort of watering hole, diverting ...
Those of us with over 10k reputation can see stats on the migrations for the last 90 days:
The top sites that questions get sent to is:
graphic design 3
UX 1 (allegedly)
I don't know if that ...
Note also the Markdown Editing Help page links through to the What HTML tags are allowed meta.SO FAQ which states in the answer:
We do not and will not allow table tags -- sorry. This is intentional and by design. If you need a quick and dirty "table", use and ASCII layout.
I just did this, as it's come up a few times where there are legitimate on-topic reasons to have this. Not just .htaccess questions, but sitemaps and all kinds of configurations needed for context in posts can be XML, JSON, etc.
See this post - there's no default style, so you'll have to specify it, but that's rather easy to do. It can be done in a ...
It is important to note that not all users have the same starting issues. So there is never a generic answer that is appropriate unless it is very general and very vague. For instance, take the "answer" posted above.
It assumes the user is not already on a CMS, like WordPress. WordPress actually has several e-commerce scripts, and some of them are more ...
[W]ould be convenient to see if someone already has an upvoted answer
The Unanswered tab lists "questions with no upvoted answers" (description at upper right-hand side of page) - upvoting an answer effectively removes the question from this tab.
These tags have been burninated.
Both seem like rather obvious tags that would apply to most - if not all - questions on the site, so they've been marked as "intrinsic" - this allows the migration of questions with these tags, but strips them as they come in.
Please, care for the widows and orphans.
I agree. I'm sure if we go through those they can be safely removed. I did a bunch a month or two ago and I don't see why we don't just finish up the remaining ~65. I'm sure those questions could use a good cleanup anyway.