Jump to content

Board Issues 4


Angalin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just FYI, the other day when I was navigating the forum and wiki Trend Micro starting flashing security warnings, most of them on something called reachms/bfmio, but also on sync/bfmio. It seems to be OK now, but I just thought you might want to know. It could be something simple like expired security tickets or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 9/30/2021 at 8:06 AM, Ran said:

I've tried that out, let me know how it works. That said, I think Cloudflare may be having issues because I've gotten the Captcha as well, and have never gotten it before. Their security systems may be acting up.

I haven't had any captchas for the last couple of days. Hopefully that's the end of the problem!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
42 minutes ago, Soylent Brown said:

The way the member titles are displaying at the moment isn't great - is there an option to put it back to how it was before the 'upgrade'?

Yes, but requires more advance editing than we've had time to do as of yet. We will be looking into it, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this update mean that the insufferable and stupid "20 pages only per thread" rule is revoked? Once again there are no good reasons to keep it other than "that's how things are done", and it's a really hostile rule from a user experience perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kyll.Ing. said:

Does this update mean that the insufferable and stupid "20 pages only per thread" rule is revoked? Once again there are no good reasons to keep it other than "that's how things are done", and it's a really hostile rule from a user experience perspective.

I guess we are hostile people round these parts. Not changing anything based on your opinion vs. the evidence of years of actual practice on this forum.

You are welcome to vote with your feet, of course. Such is the freedom of the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ran said:

I guess we are hostile people round these parts. Not changing anything based on your opinion vs. the evidence of years of actual practice on this forum.

Calling it "hostile" is going overboard, but there is a psychological barrier to starting a new thread compared to replying to an existing one, which can result in conversations getting cut off prematurely. And not being able to reply to posts from earlier installments can be a nuisance. My understanding is that the rule was originally due to software limitations that no longer apply, so maybe it is worth reconsidering whether or not it still makes sense?

I'm currently seeing (or rather, failing to see) the active page number in white on a white background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, Ran said:

I guess we are hostile people round these parts. Not changing anything based on your opinion vs. the evidence of years of actual practice on this forum.

You are welcome to vote with your feet, of course. Such is the freedom of the internet.

Increasingly, I am. I spend less and less time here. Shame, because it's a good community. There are good discussions to be had. But the moderating policies are like a handful of gravel in the cake of the forum, so to speak. It really sours the fun in the long run, as it's a hassle to stay subscribed to relevant topics (particularly with the other policy of auto-locking threads after a year), the padlocking really kills the discussion, and threads with interesting content are buried in the depths of the forum with no good way to retrieve and revive them.

Anyway, the term I was looking for was "hostile design", but it seems I didn't manage to word it properly.  The policy in question is one that hampers the user experience for no real benefit, apparently kept in place more out of stubbornness than because it makes any sort of sense to have it there.

You refer to "evidence" based on years of practice, but what kind of evidence are you seeing from this? What is the feedback? Do many people bring up "I really like that threads are closed after 20 pages for no real reason?" or is the feedback more of an "aw balls the old thread was locked so here's another writeup of the opening post, please subscribe to this thread and try to remember what we were talking about" type of thing? I don't have any concrete examples right off the bat, but I seem to remember a lot more of the latter and none of the former. It's a feature people might tolerate and respect, but not like. I think there is a pretty good reason why I have never even heard of any other forums with this type of policy anywhere on the Internet. It can't just be "my opinion" that it is a silly policy, because then it'd be a lot more widespread. Instead, if you go to literally any forum without this policy and suggest it be implemented, you'd be the laughing stock of the board within minutes.

Or let me put it this way: Why was not this very thread locked on page 20, to be replaced with "Board Issues 5"? Heck, we'd be close to Board Issues 9 by now if the policy was applied consistently, yet here we are in a 77-page thread and the server hasn't melted down yet. Could I postulate that the old thread is kept because it's a hassle to remember to lock it, write up a new opening paragraph, and get all the moderators to subscribe to the new thread every time the treshold is reached? Case in point.

Edited by Kyll.Ing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2021 at 7:11 AM, Kyll.Ing. said:

I think there is a pretty good reason why I have never even heard of any other forums with this type of policy anywhere on the Internet. It can't just be "my opinion" that it is a silly policy, because then it'd be a lot more widespread.

It used to be more widespread - I know of other forums that had the same policy in the past. On some forums the moderator who closed a thread for length would create the next installment at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, felice said:

It used to be more widespread - I know of other forums that had the same policy in the past. On some forums the moderator who closed a thread for length would create the next installment at the same time.

But this was back when forums were coded on potatoes and running on server hardware that would be put to shame by a modern wristwatch, wasn't it? I could see it being a somewhat sensible choice when long threads caused lag for users, but now that's no longer a problem. I've seen forum threads longer than 10,000 pages filled to the brim with pictures, running like clockwork.

Back in the days, such policies were required to prevent lags caused by limitations in computing power, to benefit the user experience.

Currently, this forum is running on near limitless computing power, but policies are causing conversations to lag and hamper the user experience.

We've somehow gone full circle but ended up in a reverse direction along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheLastWolf said:

Mark site read is not appearing on the top of the PC browser interface King @Ran as it used to do earlier...screen scroll lag too more pronounced (double checked if my data connection was fine and have a great RAM btw)

Yeah, I don't like that marked site read is now at the bottom. I guess their assumption is that once you've scrolled down through everything, that's where it should be. But I wouldn't mind the option at the top as well. I'll see if there's any way to fix that.

Screen scrolling is, I fear, nothing we can tweak. The CSS of the forum software has just become a bit more heavy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ran said:

Yeah, I don't like that marked site read is now at the bottom. I guess their assumption is that once you've scrolled down through everything, that's where it should be. But I wouldn't mind the option at the top as well. I'll see if there's any way to fix that.

 

Cool!

Just now, Ran said:

Screen scrolling is, I fear, nothing we can tweak. The CSS of the forum software has just become a bit more heavy.

Will it get worse as content count increases?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

Will it get worse as content count increases?

It's not a database issue, just a matter of the length of a page, I guess. So a page with 20 posts on it may be marginally slower than one with three posts. This is not the same thing as the number of pages in a thread -- two pages or twenty, should make no difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

Mark site read is not appearing on the top of the PC browser interface King @Ran as it used to do earlier...screen scroll lag too more pronounced (double checked if my data connection was fine and have a great RAM btw)

Try disabling blurred background. That made a big difference to scrolling lag for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...