|
A better option would be a "Shouting into the void" box that lets you type in your rant, press "submit", and then the message is thrown away never to be seen again. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck to them.
The original idea was to be a pressure release but all it seemed to do was encourage people to be actively nasty at one another. It went from Rant About the World to a Troll Pit.
It was truly disappointing.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I think just put "soapbox" back, but make it a link to an external social platform.
|
|
|
|
|
musefan wrote: make it a link to an external social platform.
Twitter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Twitter?
That's where most of the tw*ts meet. 
|
|
|
|
|
There was a private soapbox group used by people who were unhappy with prior attempts to moderate the public one; but apparently Chris pulled the plug on it at the same time as the main soapbox.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
When clicking trough all the still alive spammers that Griff posted yesterday, I have the problem that I don't know if I have already reported the user or not.
Could we have an indicator telling us if we have already reported a spammer or not?
It would make quite a difference in time spent I believe.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes please 
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
How do you propose that this work? Maybe I'm missing something, because what I do is
- Open the members' pages in new tabs (now I have 25 new tabs)
- Navigate to the one on the far right (have to use ">" because there are too many tabs)
- Click on the "spam" flag
- ^W to close the tab, which reveals the next tab, and back to step 3
Seeing an icon so that I don't have to click wouldn't save much time.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe by just letting the "visited link" format to be applied in S&A posts? 
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
This is my workflow:
- Right click and Open the members' pages in new tabs (usually ten at a time)
- ctrl tab to the next tab
- Check if it's a legitimate spammer, (yes I do this, that's why we need ten hits)
- If it's legitimate spam, Click on the report flag, move the mouse and click the "Spam" button on the "popup", otherwise close tab (and miss the bloody button every tenth time requiring me to re-aim on the flag and mutter some bad words
 ) - ctrl tab to the next tab and repeat steps above
- Start over from the beginning, check which tabs have ten reports and strike them from the post
- Close remaining tabs
- Repeat from the beginning
Seeing if I have already reported a post would allow me to close the tab at step two already.
|
|
|
|
|
1) Mouse wheel click opens it in a new tab automatically
2) When all opened, CTRL+TAB to next one
3) Whatever I do, report or not... CTRL+F4 to close it
4) Next Tab comes active automatically. Go to #3
5) Mentally count the tabs while closing them, to see if the total matches the SAOTD post.
I would like to have it to avoid re-reporting in the "still alives" to see if the account gets nuked or not or when reports get crossed.
Or if I missclick one (see #5) of the SAOTD and have to search for it again, now it is a re-report all acounts to hit the missed one.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
From the lounge:
It is repeatable if you open the messages in sequence from the top.
Chrome Version 83.0.4103.97 (Official Build) (64-bit)
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
What if you opened them from the bottom? Does that fix it?
(OK, OK, I'll add it to the bug list!)
[Edit: I can't replicate it. I'm on the same browser, too.  ]
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting - I just tried it again, and get the problem. But ... only if I tap each message in sequence, the keyboard moves don't show the line at all.
Ah! It doesn't give an error with the mouse either - only on a touchscreen tap.
If I mouse, the line is correct, but only there while I hover the mouse. With tap, it's permanently there and wrong.
That's on a Win 10 Surface 3 Pro BTW
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Chrome
Version 83.0.4103.97 (Official Build) (64-bit)
It's the same on the phone and the tablet.
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect it's related to this bug report: Bugs and Suggestions[^] - if so then the solution to one will fix both...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It's a \uFFFD "replacement character" when UTF encoding goes off the rails. See Minor presentation issues[^]
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for this. It's been fixed (dumb mistake saving a file and VS not saving in the correct format) which will be corrected next deploy.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Considering the answer of my message below Re:Cool[^] and the weekly poll about the article series...
I don't know how that reading list feature is being implemented or if it is thought for this purpose, but...
Would it be possible to set an "article series" attribute in the author's profile where the name of the series to be / being written are listed and then choose it in the article editor before publishing?
With that information the new "series link list" could auto-update itself and avoid to have to edit each previous article to include the link of the new article to the list (not the first time I have seen problem with those manual lists)
Example:
I plan a series about "XXX" then I add a new series in my profile, I set the tags ".Net Core, C#... whatsoever" and give the name "YYYZZZ" to the series.
Then I go to the article editor, write my content, hit "part of a series", select "YYYZZZ" in the possible combobox, hit publish
A week later I publish another article about whatsoever (not related)
And then I come back and publish the next part of the series... I go to the editor, write my content, click "part of series", select "YYYZZZ", hit publish.
The new "reading list" appears in both articles belonging "YYYZZZ" automatically and contains the links of both articles (published timestamp sorted?)
I write a third article about it, select "YYYZZZ" and publish.
The List adds a third link without having to edit the previous articles to add it manually
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
modified 10-Jun-20 2:07am.
|
|
|
|
|
Once this feature is available to authors, you will not have to edit previous articles to update the list of articles in the series.
You would create a series and add the articles to the series. Articles that are part of the series will display the list. So if you add another article to the series list, then it will show up in all the articles.
Chris and Ryan are the brains behind this feature, an might elaborate on when this will roll out to authors in general. We needed it for an internal project, so it might still have some sharp edges that need filing down.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Dennis wrote: Chris and Ryan are the brains behind this feature, an might elaborate on when this will roll out to authors in general. We needed it for an internal project, so it might still have some sharp edges that need filing down.
Yeah, Chris told me in the message below. But I didn't know how was it supposed to work, that's why I just wanted to bring some thoughts up
Matthew Dennis wrote: Once this feature is available to authors, you will not have to edit previous articles to update the list of articles in the series.
You would create a series and add the articles to the series. Articles that are part of the series will display the list. So if you add another article to the series list, then it will show up in all the articles.
Sounds good (and not so different from what I said  )
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Inspired by wizardzz's account trouble, I tried some display name tricks again. I could copy his display name with just a zero-width space in it.
I couldn't copy Chris Maunder's display name with just a zero-width space. But I could do it with a Cyrillic "а" (that's not an "a"). Perhaps the name comparisons could be improved to prevent this.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
