Review to understand, not necessarily to find problems. If you do find bugs and anti-patterns along the way, great, ask about them. But consider it your goal to learn what they did, why they did it this way.

When you’re giving feedback, phrase things as questions most of the time. Idk about you, but I’m rarely so sure of myself. If you’re saying stuff like “Would it work better if we tried xyz?” instead of “Change this to do xyz.”, people respond better. Sometimes it starts a discussion, sometimes you learn they had a good reason for what they did in the first place.

It’ll be really tempting to skim and just give it a quick Looks Good To Me. Try not to.

It’s not like they even have to break the bank to do better. Simplicity and low production value looks can make ads stick out more now than ever.

Related tweet: https://bsky.app/profile/komaniecki.bsky.social/post/3mtgzfnapbc2q

The worst is when you see something you’re curious about and ask for clarification, and they just paste your question into the LLM and paste its response back to you.

Yup!

Good excuse to switch banks. Every once in a while you can get some kind of sign-on bonus for the trouble too.

It’s the same thing, but locally scoped. So it only reviews and modifies one file. Helpful when you want to focus on one thing at a time.

I hear these names thrown around a lot. I’ve only briefly tried Calibre, and not KOReader yet.

I’m kinda curious, what’s the difference between them and the roles they fill?