amych needs to revocabularize her paradigm.
I'll be in my bunk.
Jayne ,'War Stories'
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.
Jon B. - Apr 03, 2003 10:18:51 am PST #3676 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
amyth - Apr 03, 2003 10:22:44 am PST #3677 of 10000
And none of us deserving the cruelty or the grace -- Leonard Cohen
Good of you to give amych pushback on that, Jon.
§ ita § - Apr 03, 2003 10:23:14 am PST #3678 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
it could be designed so that "unblock-a-post" would be an add-on. That is, let's get the block-a-poster-and-all-his/her-posts done first. Adding the unblock-a-single-post wouldn't require us to undo what had already been done.
In terms of my usage patterns at TT, I don't see the value in separating them. I block user X, and I'm good with that, except that someone reacts to post #1557, and I want to go and see what that post says. I do not want to unblock the poster, I just want to know what this particular kerfuffle is. I don't want to set up a scenario where I have re-blocking overhead to do after I click to read that post.
Dana - Apr 03, 2003 10:23:39 am PST #3679 of 10000
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.
I think we need to sunset our outdated terminology and repurpose ourselves.
Liese S. - Apr 03, 2003 10:36:57 am PST #3680 of 10000
"Faded like the lilac, he thought."
I see ita's potential usage.
In the blinvisible message, I'd prefer there not be a link, what with the eye-catching and all. At that point, I've already taken the action. Perhaps a link to the putative relevant faq portion elsewhere?
Michele T. - Apr 03, 2003 10:36:58 am PST #3681 of 10000
with a gleam in my eye, and an almost airtight alibi
I think the best-of-breed experience we're blue-skying here will be extensible into new vocabularistic domains by EOY.
amych - Apr 03, 2003 10:42:01 am PST #3682 of 10000
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
Fire bad. Tree pretty.
Jon B. - Apr 03, 2003 11:36:20 am PST #3683 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
In terms of my usage patterns at TT, I don't see the value in separating them. I block user X, and I'm good with that, except that someone reacts to post #1557, and I want to go and see what that post says. I do not want to unblock the poster, I just want to know what this particular kerfuffle is. I don't want to set up a scenario where I have re-blocking overhead to do after I click to read that post.
My "add-on" design would cover that. I'm imagining that we first setup code like,
if (user is blocked) then [don't display post] else
[display post]
Once that is working and in production, we could always later add a post-specific unblocking add-in like,
if (post is unblocked) then [display post] else
if (user is blocked) then [don't display post] else
[display post]
I thought there might be value in doing it in stages (getting something in production more quickly). If it's just as easy to do it all at once, then ignore me.
Gandalfe - Apr 03, 2003 11:38:29 am PST #3684 of 10000
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.
if (post is unblocked) then [display post] else
if (user is blocked) then [don't display post] else
[display post]
Wouldn't it be more:
if (post is unblocked) then [display post] else
if (user is blocked) then
if (view specific post) then [display post] else
[don't display post]
Jon B. - Apr 03, 2003 11:44:44 am PST #3685 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
That's insane troll logic.
Seriously, I think you're being redundant. The logic is applied to each post. [post is unblocked] == [view specific post]