Ha. In my case, "the common practice" means "what I always wish I'd done the second after I've just lost an epic post that would have been a turning-point in the entire worldview of everyone who read it, but not to the extent that I can actually be arsed to rewrite the whole thing"
Zoe: So you two were kissin'? Book: Well. Isn't that... special?
'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
Buffistas Building a Better Board
Do you have problems, concerns or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.
Angus G - Apr 03, 2003 6:56:14 am PST #3658 of 10000
Roguish Laird
DXMachina - Apr 03, 2003 7:01:22 am PST #3659 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
You know, if we turned the caching back on, this wouldn't happen. We'd be able to go back and find our post still in the posting box. It would probably save us some bandwidth, too.
Zoe Ann - Apr 03, 2003 7:01:31 am PST #3660 of 10000
Mathair & Athair beo.
What Angus said.
§ ita § - Apr 03, 2003 7:12:49 am PST #3661 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I still haven't found out how to turn caching on, is the problem -- anyone else know how?
Nou, with your extra interface scenario, we also need errorchecking on the "add user" side, which I was trying to avoid by only allowing you to delete a user from that page. Would that have a negative impact on the usefulness, if you had to see someone's post to block them?
My read had been that you could block a poster from a link in the psot header, and unblock them there too. Which would mean there'd need to be another link to just unhide the post. And there'd be no hiding of individual posts -- just everything by that poster -- the word "hide" is ambiguous to me that way.
DXMachina - Apr 03, 2003 7:27:18 am PST #3662 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
This was what I was talking about. We tried it before. It worked fine for me. I think it would have been just a matter of changing a couple of browser settings for others, and it was working exactly like WX.
ita "Buffistas Building a Better Board" Dec 7, 2002 9:13:10 pm EST
through
ita "Buffistas Building a Better Board" Dec 7, 2002 9:52:12 pm EST
§ ita § - Apr 03, 2003 7:33:28 am PST #3663 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I never untried that, DX.
DXMachina - Apr 03, 2003 7:39:27 am PST #3664 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I never untried that, DX.
I'm not following you. You changed a setting, the board started caching pages, but people were complaining about the Message Center not updating, so you changed it back about an hour later. Am I wrong?
§ ita § - Apr 03, 2003 7:42:08 am PST #3665 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Sorry -- I crossed my tries. There were a number of attempts.
If we have an attempt that breaks everyones message centre and everyone has to change browser settings, it's not the right solution.
There *is* one for PHP pages that doesn't require the entire IE user base changing stuff (which may break other sites -- I have no idea). 90% of PHP sites work like this. The other 10% know something. I just don't know what it is.
Jessica - Apr 03, 2003 7:51:13 am PST #3666 of 10000
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Would that have a negative impact on the usefulness, if you had to see someone's post to block them?
IMO, no. I mean, that's how bookmarking currently works, right? (You can mark or unmark a post in-thread, but only delete from the bookmarks page?)
Jon B. - Apr 03, 2003 7:58:38 am PST #3667 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
My read had been that you could block a poster from a link in the psot header, and unblock them there too. Which would mean there'd need to be another link to just unhide the post.
That was my read too. But I wasn't imagining that unhiding a post would only unhide one post. I assumed that viewing an annoying poster's posts would be an all-or-nothing choice. If you want to read a blocked poster's post, you click unhide. All the poster's posts become unblinvisible. When you're done, you click hide again, and go on your merry way.