PDA

View Full Version : confusion



Ben Calwell
7-Jun-2006, 08:33
I'm still getting used to this new format. Yesterday, I mistakenly responded to a question that Michael Kadillac posted six years ago! I thought it was a recent question from him.

Bill_1856
7-Jun-2006, 08:45
This being the LF Forum, no doubt your answer was probably timed about right.

Ralph Barker
7-Jun-2006, 10:15
I know what you mean, Ben. I was going to say it's a photographic exercise, intended to help us see the little details (like the date in the upper left corner of a post), but Wilhelm is probably more correct. ;)

GPS
7-Jun-2006, 10:56
No doubt Ben,you found one of many disadvantages of the new format. Like the constant clicking on the numbered pages if you want to see the thread in its length - before it was just simple scrolling. This is typical of all things digital - no habit can be taken for long, no acquired knowledge last for long in its practical sense.

Ralph Barker
7-Jun-2006, 10:59
GPS - you can change the number of posts, up to a max of 40, that will be displayed per page via settings in your user profile.

GPS
7-Jun-2006, 11:04
You can, but it's less user friendly than before. Just more and more clicking...

paulr
7-Jun-2006, 11:52
This is typical of all things digital - no habit can be taken for long, no acquired knowledge last for long in its practical sense.

this is to keep us from getting old and lazy.

GPS
7-Jun-2006, 12:04
From getting lazy? perhaps. From getting old? just the opposite - the quicker things change, the quicker you get older. You don't even notice and the bus is already at next station... The old forum? What was it? How did it look?

Vick Vickery
7-Jun-2006, 12:06
OK, so I'm not too good with a computer! So how do I get to my user profile to find the settings section to change the number of posts per page???

GPS
7-Jun-2006, 12:16
Log in first, find it in the upper bar then a click, click...

Sal Santamaura
7-Jun-2006, 12:24
Adams would embrace the new format. Weston would prefer the old; simple, direct, no distractions.

Capocheny
7-Jun-2006, 13:18
I see the same thing happens often times on APUG too!

So, don't feel bad about it!

Frankly, I find it kind of funny to see an antiquated thread revived... it surprises a LOT of people (including the original poster, I'm sure) and keeps everybody on their toes! :)

Cheers

Ralph Barker
7-Jun-2006, 14:26
Maybe we should change the date to blinking red. . . . Just kidding, just kidding. ;)

Marko
7-Jun-2006, 14:43
Maybe we should change the date to blinking red. . . . Just kidding, just kidding. ;)

You forgot bold... Blinking and red alone could mean many things, but blinking bold red is something else, not to mention blinking bold italic red!

1995-6 all over again? Well, at least it does not require Netscape 4.x, although the blink tag doesn't seem to work without it ;)

And yes, this new format can really be tedious to use and the old format was so much better, despite being "digital" too.

Henry Ambrose
7-Jun-2006, 15:41
I replied to a couple of old posts too, following someone's lead. I had been involved in the threads months ago. How do we find old threads and revive them? Not that I want to but how is it happening?

I've changed my bookmark to give me the unified view as my default link which seems better.

Patrik Roseen
7-Jun-2006, 16:00
I'm still getting used to this new format. Yesterday, I mistakenly responded to a question that Michael Kadillac posted six years ago! I thought it was a recent question from him.
Yes, I have noticed that under the thread I'm reading there is a list called 'Similar threads' and for some reason it seems to pick up these very old threads. Like the one called 'Circle of confusion' with it's last post 1998?

Otherwise I'm getting used to this new layout...but I have two suggestions for improvements:
1) it would be nice to be able to print a full thread in one click - this was very valuable for me getting started with LF where I could study the 'wonders of collected experience' of this forum without the need of my computer. (And yes. sometimes 40 posts will not cover the whole discussion.)

2) I always forget where to go to start a new thread ...it takes me quite a while to find it. Would it be possible to have this as a quick button somewhere and then be asked which category I would like to put it in.

BTW, I too always go into Unified View to find the latest and greatest.

Ralph Barker
7-Jun-2006, 16:29
I added two additional options that can be set in your profile for the thread display: 80 and 160. That should accommodate most threads for full print outs.

If you're at the top of the page where the Quick Links link is, the forum navigation links are just in the top left:

Patrik Roseen
7-Jun-2006, 16:56
Thanks Ralph, I just think it could be good if the 'Start thread' option was visible somewhere on the top page...as it is now the only way to start a thread is by first navigating into a specific category, right? As I said, it took me a while to figure that out. Are you suggesting I find it under Quick Links...because it's not in the list I see. Am I missing something?

Ralph Barker
7-Jun-2006, 17:11
. . . Are you suggesting I find it under Quick Links...because it's not in the list I see. Am I missing something?
No. You have to navigate to the main forum index (as shown in the above attachment), and then to the appropriate sub-forum from there. The "Unified View" is just the results of a canned search, so there's no built-in awareness of the forum structure. Adding a "new thread" button outside that context would require custom coding, which we want to avoid, due to on-going maintenance issues.

Tom Westbrook
7-Jun-2006, 17:16
Great Ralph! You'll have to tell me how you did that.

As for printing, there is a 'Show Printable Version' option up in the "Thread Tools" drop-down in the menu bar just above the posts on each page of any thread. In that view, in the upper right, you can also select to print up to 160 posts at a time.

Amund BLix Aaeng
8-Jun-2006, 02:19
I use the "Mark forums read" button everytime I leave, no problems with old posts doing that.