29

UPDATE We're in for the hats this year. We just submitted the form!


Last year, Stack Exchange ran Winter Bash 2013, in which users earned hats which they proudly displayed upon their gravatar. There was a leaderboard of hatters, mad or not:

2013 top hat wearers

It's that time of the year again and we get to choose whether we want to do it again this year. Hats are enabled on a per-site basis, but each site has to opt-in and choose to participate.

What are hats, I hear you ask. Well, hats are kinda like ephemeral badges. You can choose to have one displayed over your avatar and you win them by certain actions on the webpage. Users can turn off hats on a per-user basis, so if you're against them for any reason, you can disable the feature and not see your hats nor those of the users who have opted in. As far as you are concerned, the hats will not exist.

If we choose to accept, the event will run from 15 December 2014 to 4 January 2015. After that, all the hats go away into Last Year's Hat Bin.

We need to decide if we want hats by December 1. So, do we like hats or hate hats?

  • Meh, Community ♦ should be the one posting this D: – Braiam Nov 18 '14 at 23:54
  • @Braiam that's Mr. Community♦ to you. :P – terdon Nov 18 '14 at 23:54
  • 2
    @terdon Sexist! Anyway it should be community, or -1 with the -n option. – Gilles Nov 19 '14 at 1:20
  • 1
    I'm resisting the urge to edit the question to say "your mission, should you choose to accept it," and link to the Mission: Impossible Wikipedia page, since that's what my mind immediately went to when you said "if we choose to accept". – strugee Nov 20 '14 at 6:31
  • I thought a hat (like hair) was there to cover a non-perfect head. I guess not everyone can be so lucky to look like captain P. – Anthon Nov 20 '14 at 7:46
  • 1
    @Anthon you remind me of a t-shirt my Dad used to have which carried the slogan "God made a few perfect heads. On the rest of them, he put hair". I may not agree with the theological implications there but I still find it funny. – terdon Nov 20 '14 at 14:01
  • 1
    @terdon That was exactly the quote I had in mind that was the basis for my comment, and I reworded it for exactly the same implications. – Anthon Nov 20 '14 at 14:22
  • 1
    @Anthon Ah, all you people with wide partings think alike :) – terdon Nov 20 '14 at 14:28
  • Have the comment threads of fedora questions in previous hatsy years stayed in control? – Anko Nov 22 '14 at 19:46
  • @Anko oddly enough, yes. At least to my knowledge. – terdon Nov 22 '14 at 19:49
  • [status-completed] can now be added to this, since there will indeed be hats. – Doorknob Dec 3 '14 at 1:08
47

Yes, of course we want hats!

Don't be a hater, be a hatter!1


But I think the more important question is:

Why is a raven like a writing desk?

  • Is there a Mad Hatter hat? – Wilf Nov 19 '14 at 19:53
  • @Wilf I sure hope so! – Seth Nov 19 '14 at 21:03
  • 1
    HATS off to you sir :D – Joseph R. Nov 21 '14 at 6:08
  • 1
    @Wilf There beret be one. – Anko Nov 22 '14 at 19:44
-3

No to the hats!

Let the avatars be free, unencumbered by the headware of lollygaggers and poppinjays...

  • 3
    To the downvoter: really? How could we have a Yes/No poll with only one answer. Grinch. – jasonwryan Nov 19 '14 at 3:14
  • 3
    Surely we need to downvote for this to be a yes/no poll! – terdon Nov 19 '14 at 3:46
  • 3
    @terdon Given this was a $holiday intiative, I foolishly assumed goodwill and a spirit of benevolence would apply; downvoting just seems as churlish as it is unecessary: vote for what you support, not to mark the counter proposal as "not useful". – jasonwryan Nov 19 '14 at 5:04
  • 3
    Goodwill? Benevolence? But you're grinching! Seriously though, while I did not downvote, probably out of a spirit of goodwill and cheer and all that, it does seem reasonable to downvote. If only to offset the upvotes on the position you disagree with. As a general rule, these types of poll questions with directly contradicting answers need both upvotes and downvotes to make the community's position clear. After all, downvotes on meta can simply mean "I disagree", so I can understand the vote. – terdon Nov 19 '14 at 5:12
  • 1
    @terdon while an issue this trivial probably doesn't warrant extended discussion... Everyone only has one upvote (unless of course people both want and don't want hats); so the downvote is pointless--other than to magnify mean spiritedness, hence my Grinch comment. – jasonwryan Nov 19 '14 at 7:07
  • 3
    They should implement this for regular ol' representational democracy. I mostly don't vote (or else spoil my ballot, they have to count those), but I'd be in there every time if I could cast a negative vote for someone: "-1 for you jerk!" – goldilocks Nov 19 '14 at 16:05
  • I just really don't like people without hats ^ – Alko Nov 19 '14 at 16:58
  • 1
    @goldilocks Nice suggestion, if this was implemented for public office then no one would get elected XD (Which is probably not that bad) – datUser Nov 19 '14 at 16:59
  • @datUser Someone still has to be elected, lol, but seeing them celebrate the least negative count would be great ("Only -7% support!"). I think there have been a few cases in U.S. municipal elections where the spoiled ballot won, not sure what happened after that. – goldilocks Nov 19 '14 at 17:06
  • @goldilocks Ah the true zero sum game. OK sorry for the off- topicness. – datUser Nov 19 '14 at 17:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .