Jump to content
Khallayne

We want Forum Feedback!

Recommended Posts

I THOUGHT TJ said that the alternatives were to be retired in the end and the only alternative would be the invision default (as in vanilla plain, lovely and dull !)

 

ETA from the announcement thread:

 

Unfortunate, but thank you.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm currently on Version 9.0.3 (9537.86.4.4) of Safari. Link to a screen shot of what I see.

 

From what I can see my version of Safari was actually released in January of 2016 (surprising since I don't remember updating back then), so that's not likely to be the reason it has so much dead space. It could instead be because of the fact that I have a laptop with a small screen?

Share this post


Link to post
@ TJ - Will the new forum software include a way to search within a specific thread?

It does not appear to be a feature of any future versions of IPB (IPB3 or IPB4).

Share this post


Link to post

I just wanted to say thanks to the moding team for ending enforced necroing. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
I just wanted to say thanks to the moding team for ending enforced necroing. smile.gif

Um. They did?

 

C4.

Share this post


Link to post

Considering they closed the OLD thread about putting the "accepting aid" message and left the NEW one open instead of the other way round, and considering they didn't merge the threads - I think they did. biggrin.gif

Edited by olympe

Share this post


Link to post

Considering they closed the OLD thread about putting the "accepting aid" message and left the NEW one open instead of the other way round, and considering they didn't merge the threads - I think they did. biggrin.gif

Where IS the old one then ? I knew there was one but I couldn't find it !

 

NME - searching the word accepting rather than accept did it for me. Wow. OK. (Not that I was that against necroing, but still.)

Edited by fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post
Where IS the old one then ? I knew there was one but I couldn't find it !

 

NME - searching the word accepting rather than accept did it for me. Wow. OK. (Not that I was that against necroing, but still.)

I bumped it with a link to the new topic when I closed it, so it should just show up in the most recent threads in this section. =p

(I found it by going to the full search and putting "accepting aid" (with the quotation marks) in. I don't think I searched only by title, but even searching whole posts I didn't get too many results. /in case my search methods help anyone)

 

And yes, I've stopped closing dupes for old threads. There's a couple I did this for in GD/Video Games as well. ^^;;

 

Now if there were a way to un-merge a thread, but oh well.

 

We can, but it's a lot harder than merging, as we can't just go "unmerge this merged thread" - we'd have to know exactly what posts went in what thread and hand select them. However, considering the context here, most likely, if we could find the OP of the new thread that was merged, we could just select all posts after that and unmerge. Since I often put the new OP quotes in the OP of the old thread, that should be fairly easy to do. So if you have a request to unmerge a (recent-ish) thread, please feel free to request it. I'll see what I can do. ^^

Share this post


Link to post
I bumped it with a link to the new topic when I closed it, so it should just show up in the most recent threads in this section. =p

(I found it by going to the full search and putting "accepting aid" (with the quotation marks) in. I don't think I searched only by title, but even searching whole posts I didn't get too many results. /in case my search methods help anyone)

 

And yes, I've stopped closing dupes for old threads. There's a couple I did this for in GD/Video Games as well. ^^;;

 

Now if there were a way to un-merge a thread, but oh well.

 

We can, but it's a lot harder than merging, as we can't just go "unmerge this merged thread" - we'd have to know exactly what posts went in what thread and hand select them. However, considering the context here, most likely, if we could find the OP of the new thread that was merged, we could just select all posts after that and unmerge. Since I often put the new OP quotes in the OP of the old thread, that should be fairly easy to do. So if you have a request to unmerge a (recent-ish) thread, please feel free to request it. I'll see what I can do. ^^

Perhaps instead of bumping the old thread, just add a link to it in the OP of the new thread?

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps instead of bumping the old thread, just add a link to it in the OP of the new thread?

I prefer the added link to the OP, myself.

 

And thank you Sock, I like this change!

 

Cheers!

C4.

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps instead of bumping the old thread, just add a link to it in the OP of the new thread?

I think that would be very helpful. It happens everywhere else I go.

Share this post


Link to post
Perhaps instead of bumping the old thread, just add a link to it in the OP of the new thread?

Tbh, I debated putting a link of anything anywhere, as I doubt there are many people who are going to be interested enough to actually go read the old thread. But I chose to add the link to the old thread, as I thought that might have more of a chance of being spotted (particularly by anyone subscribed to the old thread who would be interested in the new thread), than adding a link to the new thread OP. Especially as edits like that can go easily unnoticed by both OP and anyone who's seen the thread before the link is edited in.

 

But if users do like that idea, I can do it.

 

Tbh, if we go the route of more routinely closing suggestions threads so we don't have to worry about closing old dupes, I'm not sure it's really even worth it to bother with a link? Obviously not applicable unless we routinely close old suggestions, but yeah. =u

Share this post


Link to post

Omg the @username feature that gives you a notification whenever people tag you would be IMMENSELY useful.

 

The way it's worked on my other forums is that you can turn the feature off so you won't get notifications, but for those who want to know when people reply to then without subscribing to threads and getting tons of emails every day, it would be so useful.

 

Alternative approach - when you subscribe to a thread, you should get a notification on your forum account that somebody posted in that thread. Not emails.

 

Please please pretty please xd.png

Edited by Pryanka

Share this post


Link to post
Tbh, I debated putting a link of anything anywhere, as I doubt there are many people who are going to be interested enough to actually go read the old thread. But I chose to add the link to the old thread, as I thought that might have more of a chance of being spotted (particularly by anyone subscribed to the old thread who would be interested in the new thread), than adding a link to the new thread OP. Especially as edits like that can go easily unnoticed by both OP and anyone who's seen the thread before the link is edited in.

 

But if users do like that idea, I can do it.

 

Tbh, if we go the route of more routinely closing suggestions threads so we don't have to worry about closing old dupes, I'm not sure it's really even worth it to bother with a link? Obviously not applicable unless we routinely close old suggestions, but yeah. =u

Putting a link to an old thread would be very useful. I was BIG in the old aid thread, and couldn't find it - because the people who had been in it had kind of given up on it ever happening, I think so it sank without trace -which means that new viewers wouldn't be looking through and find it. If no-one is interested -the link wouldn't be used -but it would be useful for people like me who were looking for it quite hard when it sort of came up in another thread entirely. And I am finding it useful looking over what was said then.

 

I was looking for "accept aid" in suggestions - and it didn't come up. You got a better word. But the search function here ISN'T great, so it would be most useful, please and thank you !

Share this post


Link to post
Tbh, I debated putting a link of anything anywhere, as I doubt there are many people who are going to be interested enough to actually go read the old thread. But I chose to add the link to the old thread, as I thought that might have more of a chance of being spotted (particularly by anyone subscribed to the old thread who would be interested in the new thread), than adding a link to the new thread OP. Especially as edits like that can go easily unnoticed by both OP and anyone who's seen the thread before the link is edited in.

 

But if users do like that idea, I can do it.

 

Tbh, if we go the route of more routinely closing suggestions threads so we don't have to worry about closing old dupes, I'm not sure it's really even worth it to bother with a link? Obviously not applicable unless we routinely close old suggestions, but yeah. =u

I'd only close the old threads if they are over 1 year since the last post, and if the topic comes up again.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Share this post


Link to post

Was changing the "Stupid things you've done on DC" thread name really necessary? I realize there are those who believe that 'stupid' is some kind of slur or swear word, but should personal preference and opinion really be getting in the way of an inconsequentially harmless thread name?

 

I'm more afraid of what this may entail for the future. More broad spectrum censorship, like for the words stupid, dumb, idiot, crazy, psycho, weird, fat, lame, communist, polka dot, short, slow... god? Satan? Like, not to give anyone ideas, but there is a fine line between realistic censorship and over-the-top, I'm-pushing-my-beliefs-onto-everyone censorship. DC had a period where it was unbelievably over the top with censoring, such as the phrase "no offense" being blanked out, but that was toned down much to the relief of the entire internet and society as a whole. Do we really want to take a step back and head towards that era once more?

Share this post


Link to post

Was changing the "Stupid things you've done on DC" thread name really necessary? I realize there are those who believe that 'stupid' is some kind of slur or swear word, but should personal preference and opinion really be getting in the way of an inconsequentially harmless thread name?

 

I'm more afraid of what this may entail for the future. More broad spectrum censorship, like for the words stupid, dumb, idiot, crazy, psycho, weird, fat, lame, communist, polka dot, short, slow... god? Satan? Like, not to give anyone ideas, but there is a fine line between realistic censorship and over-the-top, I'm-pushing-my-beliefs-onto-everyone censorship. DC had a period where it was unbelievably over the top with censoring, such as the phrase "no offense" being blanked out, but that was toned down much to the relief of the entire internet and society as a whole. Do we really want to take a step back and head towards that era once more?

I agree 100%. Why was this done, and by whom ? If the OP - maybe fair enough; an OP has rights over their thread. If a mod thing - not fair enough at all. I have done many stupid things here and in the cave. Probably including making this post.... And they were far more than silly or frustrating - they were STUPID. There is no other word for some of them. Except maybe dumb - which I suspect is just as "bad"...

 

Oh. ETA:

 

from TLQ

 

If it wasn't allowed, it would be fully censored (say crap was still censored, it would be censor evasion to write cr*p or even c***). It is allowed.

 

I changed it because the term is ableist, and I thought it's be nicer to be sensitive.

I'm afraid I very much disagree with you. The things I have done that qualified no longer qualify under silly or irritating. They were plain stupid. And how is that ableist ? I don't have to call what I did stupid if I don't want to. No-one is calling the people who did them stupid, only what they did, and it's the people who did them that are saying this.

 

Edited by fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post

Alright, I'll change it back and just won't use the thread.

Sock - you know I think a lot of you - but if YOU chose to say YOU have done something stupid (which is not the same things as your saying YOU are stupid) where is the issue ?

 

I would defend to the death your changing (or actually completely deleting !) a thread where I get to say YOU are stupid - or even that you DID something stupid - but the thread is self referencing. No-one has to post that they did something stupid unless that is exactly what they mean and want to say...

 

(I don't use the thread anyway as I think it's - stupid ! - but that's a whole nother issue laugh.gif)

 

ETA just read your latest in TLQ. Stupid is only derogatory when aimed at an individual. A stupid action is just that - a stupid action, which could have been something done by Einstein or Obama.

Edited by fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post
-snip-

This is getting off-topic. The comment that people don't believe the change was fine in here, but if you want to debate what words are or are not offensive for whatever reasons, that would be a discussion for GD.

 

I've already changed the name back, so there's not really anything more to add to the discussion.

 

~

 

I am sorry for causing confusion to anybody.

Share this post


Link to post

I tried again to use the 'updated' forum skin... and the cave skin.. and I still don't like either. Lasted about 6 hours this time but HAD to change back due to a headache. So I'm back on the old default forum skin and the St Pat's skin on the cave.

 

Please, please, please when you do the final upgrade allow us a plain no frills attached skin for the forum and the cave.

 

Call me a minimalist, but I'd be happy with plain text, text links and just the dragon images. The simpler the format the better.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.