A new forum?

by Flynn Taggart on 02/11/2006 12:19, 69 messages, last message: 02/27/2006 11:08, 24242 views, last view: 05/05/2024 13:03

I got nothing against this forum,but i was thinking about making a little bit more complex forum.What do you think?

   Board Index   

#50: Re: ..

by Passa on 02/23/2006 21:59, refers to #49

stay on topic please? everyone here just flames threads and argues about stupid stuff.

if your guna add *something* to these forums can you also make it that when you visit a thread you have visited before, it not only shows the new messages but also the one before the new ones so you know what people are replying to. normally i just refresh the page but it would be easier if it was like that. such as in this case where i didnt refresh the page and i dont know why asdff is so upset about something.

reply to this message

#51: Re: ..

by Passa on 02/23/2006 22:03, refers to #50

oh now the page is refreshed i geddit. asdff, you got upset over a comment like that? OMG were sTILL arguing about editing posts? ive already taught myself to read over them and i agree with makkE, why waste time putting in a feature like that when you just read your post before you click 'SUBMIT'.

reply to this message

#52: Ok

by SleepwalkR on 02/24/2006 01:05

Here are my three arguments against an edit feature:

1) It's work for me. I really have little time to work on this stuff. Running the fov120.com server (which hosts cube and sauer) is more work than it might seem to you guys. And, I might add, I get next to nothing from this - nobody pays for the hosting (which is not to say that I expect that, I offered free hosting to my friends). But I don't even play cube or sauer. I just think they are great projects and Aard is a good friend.

2) It can seriously hurt coherence. If someone edits a post that others have replied to, their replies can become distorted or, in the worst case, completely senseless. And that is really something I personally don't want in any forum I am visiting.

3) Aard doesn't want it, for the reasons he has stated. And since this message board is his show, I'm not going to implement anything that he does not want here.

Hopefully this clears things up and puts an end to this discussion.

reply to this message

#53: Re: Ok

by Passa on 02/24/2006 06:29, refers to #52

thats cool with me. but is it alot of work to show the message before the new ones too?

reply to this message

#54: Re: Ok

by SleepwalkR on 02/24/2006 10:23, refers to #53

What do you mean?

reply to this message

#55: Re: Ok

by Passa on 02/24/2006 12:17, refers to #54

just now I opened this thread. all I saw was the new message, your one. then i thought, what did I say before? so I refreshed. could you make it that when you revisit a thread it shows the new posts but also the post before the new ones.

reply to this message

#56: Re: Ok

by SleepwalkR on 02/24/2006 22:45, refers to #55

I'm not sure that would make sense - what if the last post does not help you to understand the latest posts? What if I was referring to something that was said much earlier?

What do other people think about this? It's an interesting point, maybe you can elaborate more.

reply to this message

#57: ..

by CC_machine4 on 02/24/2006 23:58

about editing a post that someone has replied to, just make it so that you cant edit a post unless it's the most recent post in the thread. my arguments:

-editing posts often help prevent stupid insults. if you see something that just completely disgusts you, you will want to reply with an insult. if you are then able to edit that message, and read over the thread, you may change your tone. (understand it better.) i really hate double posting saying i was out of line and apologise.

-editing posts help to get rid of outdated information. you could set it up so that in a thread, the first post can be changed by the thread starter, but if this is done there should be a big notice underneath saying it's been edited.

i can't think of any reasons not to implement it.

---quote-------------------------------
1) It's work for me.
---------------------------------------
erm, everything requires work in some way. avoiding it makes it seem harder than it is.

reply to this message

#58: Re: ..

by Passa on 02/25/2006 03:08, refers to #57

hes doing it for free and he has a life other than running a website for a friend.

reply to this message

#59: Re: Ok

by Passa on 02/25/2006 03:10, refers to #56

maybe you could make it that any posts that are replied to are also shown. so if someone has pressed reply to this message and replied, it shows the reply AND the original message.

reply to this message

#60: Re: Ok

by asdff on 02/25/2006 23:10, refers to #52

thank you SleepwalkR and cc_machine for adding some serious and reasonable responses to this editing sub-thread.
a breath of fresh air. 8)

cc, you bring up a good point, that flaming could be alleviated a little by people being able to revise after they have the bigger picture.
of course most flame cuz they WANT to flame, but.....still good.
plus for all the other reasons. 8)

i might have changed my first reply to gilt/sleepwalkr.
where i said something like:
"GOOD SOLUTION. It sure is EASY."
it might have sounded like i was disgusted with that line of thinking, but I am not.

i recognize that even the simplest features and apps can be alot more involved than you can imagine once you actually get to coding on it.
and then there are all kinds of bugfixes and support issues.

thanks helping out the project sleepwalkr.

reply to this message

#61: Re: ..

by asdff on 02/25/2006 23:17, refers to #49

--------------------------------------
I am not sure what your problem is, and why you go insult people over such a small matter.
--------------------------------------

maybe if you tried reading my message.

you know, you could take this same statement and direct it back at yourself. in fact that is the basic message behind my posts to you.

i have have actually lurked here awhile
and have a history of seeing your interactions with people. so this is partially based on just your public interactions in general and not just this particular sub-thread.



--------------------------------------
if I feel I have explained myself clearly, and then people go call me stupid and other things, I tend not to take them seriously anymore and just
--------------------------------------

again, this also works both ways.

but i HAVE to take you seriously since
you are the leader of this project.


--------------------------------------
joke about it. Or in this case, where the person just continues ranting on randomly, I will start ignoring them.
--------------------------------------

random?
you have the brains to understand.
if only you would apply brains to people issues.
or are you handicapped in this department? i personally think its out of carelessness rather than that you don't have any social skills. maybe i am wrong.

that in itself, is the most insulting thing about you. your overall careless
attitude about other people.
especially now that the project is so
significantly sustained by other coders.

this particular sub-thread doesn't mean that much to me.
i would have never suggested an editing feature myself. and if
people had reasonable comments about it, or just ignored the suggestion entirely you would have not heard another word from me about it.

reply to this message

#62: ..

by Passa on 02/25/2006 23:53

you congratulate SleepwalkR and cc_machine for adding some content to this thread, then you start whining about others. get over it ok. telling off aard saying that he has trouble understanding people issues is just stupid.

anyway, back to the point. do you guys understand what im talking about with showing posts that have been replied to also?

reply to this message

#63: Re: ..

by SleepwalkR on 02/26/2006 00:25, refers to #62

Passa, yeah, I get it, but I'm still not seeing a reasonable way to do it. Showing the last post of a thread doesn't really help because in the most cases, it won't clarify much - posts usually are in reply to posts prior to the last one.

And showing the posts that were replied to doesn't sound good to me either - because I wouldn't know where to stop. Oh, and there's a small link in every reply with which you can jump to the referred post. If there is a reasonable way to add more coherence, I'd do it, but I don't see it.

reply to this message

#64: Re: ..

by Passa on 02/26/2006 01:25, refers to #63

ok, thats cool, unless you could just remove the whole new posts feature?

reply to this message

#65: ..

by makkE on 02/26/2006 02:05

I am against removing it. After all, where´s the problem with clicking refresh once?
Either I know what the last posts were, or I don´t remember and click refresh.
I like the feature, since you get to read the new stuff instantly, without having to scroll up or something.

reply to this message

#66: Re: ..

by tentus on 02/26/2006 03:39, refers to #65

i like it too. it makes it much easier for me to keep up.

at this point, i just want moderators. that alone would make me happy. the ability for *someone responsible* to easily delete spam and flames. i don't know that person or persons would be- that'd be aard's decision. but such people would greatly benefit the forums.

reply to this message

#67: Re: ..

by Passa on 02/26/2006 04:03, refers to #66

yer i guess.

that would be a good idea, people to clean up spam and flames. would that be difficult to code into the current forums though?

reply to this message

#68: Re: ..

by SleepwalkR on 02/26/2006 19:36, refers to #67

I won't be removing the new posts feature, that would be rather bad for everyone I think.

Moderation is on my to do list.

reply to this message

#69: Re: ..

by Passa on 02/27/2006 11:08, refers to #68

thats ok then. moderation means that people (moderators) will be able to clan up spam right?

reply to this message

   Board Index