Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    4:28 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: Talk back to us! > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Hooray! Ignore short messages button now available! Back to Topics
Hemond

Champion Author
Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2013 2:34:46 PM

Kudos to the software engineers. I just noticed the new 'ignore short messages button'

Now we don't have to look at the flood of abusive 1 word junk posts which pollute every thread here on GB. Just tried it out and it removes at least five words. Maybe any 1 liner or less gets deleted? Great! Excellent.

Those who can't take the time to express a coherent thought should go back to AOL.

These yes/no/maybe/perhaps posts are irritating, rude, and borderline trolling.

[Edited by: Hemond at 4/12/2013 2:37:03 PM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Topic is locked
Profile Pic
caddilac
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:19,149
Points:2,626,605
Joined:Apr 2007
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 4:59:36 PM

Hemond, just read what I wrote.

I WASN'T defending one word posts.

I hope that was clear enough for you to understand without having to write a novella.

What I WAS saying was, that more words, or characters in this case, doesn't make a post more readable or convey a proper message from one's brain to the written word seen on another person's computer monitor.

The sentence I copied and pasted from YOUR post was an excellent example of more characters being meaningless.

eg: "Just tried it out and it removes at least five words."

But checking the box doesn't REMOVE any words at all.

What it does do is to block posts that don't reach the 60 character minimum.

I also stated, in not too many words, that an educated person might be able to convey what he/she thought with less than 60 characters.

Just read what I wrote and you will see what I was saying.

I would be more concerned with those LAZY people that don't take the time to re-read what they typed to make sure that their message made sense, than I would be about their uneducated cousins that can't type anything other than "OK" posts.

Those "OK" posts I find easy to scroll past, but I find it extremely time consuming to try to read some of the garbage some here pass off as "coherent" messages.

And I don't find it too difficult to click onto the number, at the bottom of the list of posts to take me to the next page, if i was curious to see if there were any relevant posts on the next page, or the page after that one, or the next.......

Does it take that much time to re-read one's post to make sure the sentence structure makes sense?

Does it take that much time to re-read one's post to make sure that what they refer to is at least moderately accurate?

Even when I posted to you that it was a BOX that needed to be checked, not a BUTTON, you chose to ignore that relevant fact in your response to me.

And, my response wasn't "snarky", it was FACTUAL, unlike your reference to a BUTTON instead of a BOX that needed to be checked.

Posting inaccurate things like that are what makes for garbage being passed on as fact.

Have you not seen it yourself here on GasBuddy?

One person posts garbage, and makes up numbers to bolster their bogus claim, then a few posts later, or higher up in the list, another poster will take up those bogus numbers and pass them off again as fact, without even doing the simplest research to see if the original poster was spouting garbage or not.

Instead of getting anal about some uneducated clod that posts a one word "OK" post, why don't you take up the torch and champion for something that is more important, like say, maybe accountability for what one posts as fact in their message?

There ARE more important features that could be instigated here on GasBuddy then some BOX to block one word posts.

If you see a post by someone, that only has one word as a reply, then chances are that all of their posts are the same one word replies, and there ALREADY EXISTS a feature here on GasBuddy to resolve that annoying trait in people.

It is the "IGNORE" function at the top-right side of the panel you read their message.

To add yet another function, such as a BOX to check in order to block such posts, is therefore REDUNDANT.


[Edited by: caddilac at 4/18/2013 5:06:34 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Michael29644
Champion Author Greenville

Posts:6,939
Points:1,211,200
Joined:Jan 2011
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 4:24:27 PM

"Yes. There is a faction here only to ridicule, harass, intimidate and spread misinformation. Wonder why the site tolerates this behavior that is clearly in violation of the site use guidelines?"

I wonder about that, too. My personal policy is to put the OK'ers in my ignore list. That list is now approaching 800 members, and it's astonishing to me how many of them are long time members. But at least for me it has made the forums, especially Newsville, a much better experience.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:95,183
Points:3,738,865
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 4:15:39 PM

Yup I get it! Missed my typo! But that did have a certain ring to it~
Profile Pic
teafortwo
Champion Author Washington

Posts:26,376
Points:1,867,235
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 3:36:01 PM


Good point Gas Buddy from Maryland. Your comment:

"If you make it 20, some members will say that all that will happen is the "trolls and the mischievious" will post a 21 character response just to harass others"

Yes. There is a faction here only to ridicule, harass, intimidate and spread misinformation.

Wonder why the site tolerates this behavior that is clearly in violation of the site use guidelines?

Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:29,374
Points:3,520,070
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 3:05:39 PM

"Wonder if this is a sign of things to come from the new ownership?"

I seriously doubt that the new ownership is concerned with the length of topic replies.

"I am at a total loss of where they came up with 60 characters as a length?"

60 characters is an arbitrary number. As TB (a moderator) said, "This can be adjusted by us in the future." It wouldn't matter what number of characters was chosen (forgetting the possibility of the number being changed in the future). If you make it 60, some members will say "That's too many; too man fluff responses still show" whereas others will say it eliminates short but informative responses. If you make it 20, some members will say that all that will happen is the "trolls and the mischievious" will post a 21 character response just to harass others, and yet other members will say that it eliminates short responses when a short response is appropriate.

Obviously the wording of each original post generates its own type of responses, some of which (like it or not) are a member's simply acknowledging the previous post or initial post ("Yeah; I agree...") and still others who (in their own view) want people to know that they've seen the topic.

There's simply no single "hide the response" solution that will satisfy everyone, whether it be the number of words in a response or the number of letters. And enabling each individual member to come up with his/her own solution as to the number of letters or words in a post to be hidden wouldn't necessarily be a definitive solution because that too could preclude intelligent responses from being seen, or would still allow the "fluff" to be seen.

For now, the 60 character "ignore" is a working solution, subject to change. That's all it is.
Profile Pic
teafortwo
Champion Author Washington

Posts:26,376
Points:1,867,235
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 2:35:13 PM


I am at a total loss of where they came up with 60 characters as a length?

As others have pointed out, a lot can be conveyed in 60 characters. It is this long:

123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890

1********10********20********30********40*******50********60

I thought the annoyance was the 2 letter "OK", 4 letters, or "whatever" types of comments?

I just had a thought. Perhaps the target is also the "the price of gas here today is ...."
from the members that seem unable to grasp the article submission guidelines?

I agree with zimcity. Wonder if this is a sign of things to come from the new ownership?



[Edited by: teafortwo at 4/18/2013 2:38:20 PM EST]
Profile Pic
CampKohler
Champion Author Sacramento

Posts:12,484
Points:1,963,915
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 1:35:12 PM

Byte_Doctor: Oh, you know how to make a guy's day!
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,114
Points:4,140,335
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 11:12:36 AM

"The new feature is one of the best changes ever introduced on GB."

One of the most useless features ever introduced on GB, especially considering how many more needed fixes have not been implemented.
Profile Pic
Byte_Doctor
Champion Author Akron

Posts:6,258
Points:1,204,565
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 7:32:11 AM

SM, CK was making a play on words based on your typo in your previous post:

SM wrote: "...sweeping the dust under the rung "

CK Wrote: "it's a lot easier to do the former than the ladder"

Geddit?
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 7:09:13 AM

Caddilac,

Just read your snarky response.

Being a regular on GB I noticed the new feature immediately and posted a topic to lead off the discussion. As the membership started testing the new feature we discovered its intricacies. We discovered it was character based not word based.

This is how things work in the real world.


The new feature is one of the best changes ever introduced on GB. No longer do you have to scroll through dozens of inane 1 word posts to find thoughtful commentary. One word posts are a plague and only serve to earn points. They are a pestilence on this forum. It is a sunny day here on GB now that we can eliminate these abusive one word posts.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:95,183
Points:3,738,865
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Apr 18, 2013 6:56:19 AM

"Programming-wise, it's a lot easier to do the former than the ladder. :-)"

I think you meant latter, CampKohler.

Yes it is easier to do but easier is not always better.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:22,921
Points:4,163,780
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2013 11:33:17 PM

caddilac, you seem to be suggesting that it's "easy" to "just scroll past" the fluff messages without use of the new feature. That's not true when the signal/noise ratio is in the neighborhood that we're considering here; it takes a significant fraction of one's time to read enough of a message to know that it is in fact fluff.

Of course, if you find that the new feature has no value for any of the threads that you expect to read, you're free to ignore it. There seems to be no harm in making it available to those who will find it useful, right?
Profile Pic
caddilac
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:19,149
Points:2,626,605
Joined:Apr 2007
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2013 5:27:58 PM


Hemond, in one of your sentences you say "Just tried it out and it removes at least five words."

What does that mean?

Does it mean that when you CHECK the "ignore short messages" BOX it removes "five words" from someone's post?

Or does it mean that it removes posts that have sentences that are "at least five words" in length?

But if a post has AT LEAST five words then it must have more than five words to start with or there can be no "at least".

Is that the "coherent thought" you are talking about?

I'm confused as to what is so "coherent" about that sentence of yours that I referenced above.

Also, there is no " 'ignore short messages button' ", it is a BOX that needs to be checked, not a BUTTON at all.

I think, in my opinion, you need to look up the meaning of the word "coherent", and "button".

[Edited by: caddilac at 4/17/2013 5:32:38 PM EST]
Profile Pic
caddilac
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:19,149
Points:2,626,605
Joined:Apr 2007
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2013 4:52:10 PM


It could be possible to convey a meaningful message without getting up to that 60 character limit.

People with higher education can express themselves with fewer, more concise words, to say what they mean.

Just because someone rambles on and on, with multiple paragraphs, doesn't mean they are getting their message through.

I have come across just such replies, in the news sections, and they ramble on and on saying nothing of importance or intellect.

There is no GasBuddy requirement that says you have to stop at each and every post and read them.

It doesn't take much effort to skip though those one word replies, FYI to those that haven't the intellect to just scroll past them, or those that are anal and just look for things to whine and moan about.

I'd like to see a button to block all of the people that haven't anything better to do than whine and moan about others.

Or a button to block those that can't spell or make a coherent sentences because they haven't a clue OR ARE JUST TOO LAZY to educate themselves on how to structure a sentence so that it makes sense without having to guess what they are trying to say.

Some people just can't be pleased, because when you correct one thing they will go looking for another thing that bothers them and whine about that as well, and the next thing, and the next, and the next,...........

Geeze, I hope I met that 60 character limit so that my post doesn't bother those that have little patience, or are anal about everything.



[Edited by: caddilac at 4/17/2013 4:59:29 PM EST]
Profile Pic
CampKohler
Champion Author Sacramento

Posts:12,484
Points:1,963,915
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2013 3:46:30 PM

SM wrote: "...sweeping the dust under the rung instead of putting it in the trash bin."

Programming-wise, it's a lot easier to do the former than the ladder. :-)
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:95,183
Points:3,738,865
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2013 6:54:02 AM

"What I do is never start a thread which can be answered yes or no."

Based on the threads (topics) you have started, the above statement is not accurate.

"I never respond to such a thread either."

Based on the threads (topics) you have posted in, this is not accurate either.

There are times when posts shorter than sixty (60) characters are extremely relevant to the discussion. I think the cutoff should be no greater than forty (40) characters.
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 11:15:30 PM

QUOTE :::Not to mention those who start absolutely asinine threads like "do you use seatbelts" or "does your windshield have a crack in it?":::

What I do is never start a thread which can be answered yes or no. I never respond to such a thread either. Once you respond, you have married that thread for life. Also check the post count. If it has 10,000 posts stay away.

You might also consider never starting a thread with a question. Make a definitive statement which requires discussion, ( like this thread). If you start off a thread with 'Do you...' you will be bombed with hideous yes/nos.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:95,183
Points:3,738,865
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 10:26:48 PM

This option doesn't get rid of the clutter. All it does is hide it. Sort of like sweeping the dust under the rung instead of putting it in the trash bin.
Profile Pic
maxstar
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:21,619
Points:1,296,650
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 7:29:56 PM

Agreed TxJeans, if members do not want to have a discussion, there is an entire category for them.

I have reported flatcreek, who is just flaunting the posting guidelines by posting for points here.

Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:6,943
Points:726,030
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 7:15:16 PM

Thanks TB.
90% of the General "Gas Talk" could qualify as being more appropriate for the JFF forum.

For newsville, I think if you just removed the points for that area...But, I suspect that you just can't separate it out from the other forums or it would have been done. No points and a size requirement would clean up newsville.
Profile Pic
gomondizer
Champion Author Missouri

Posts:1,338
Points:182,850
Joined:Jun 2012
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 10:01:58 AM

"These yes/no/maybe/perhaps posts are irritating, rude, and borderline trolling."

Not to mention those who start absolutely asinine threads like "do you use seatbelts" or "does your windshield have a crack in it?"

Some of the threads where you post number or letter just to get your points have more intellectual credibility than many of the threads on "car talk".

Profile Pic
teafortwo
Champion Author Washington

Posts:26,376
Points:1,867,235
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 1:18:56 AM


Thanks jrsva.
I suspected it was exactly 60 characters. What I was attempting to do was give a visual reference as to what 60 characters looks like since most of us do not usually count the characters in our comments :0\ It is longer than I thought and I am a bit surprised. I thought the bothersome target, was to get rid of the "OK" posts, which are usually not more than 2 to 4 characters?.

123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890

There. That is exactly 60 characters long ;0}
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:12,327
Points:2,100,125
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 1:01:37 AM

Thanks for the info, TB. Too bad about not being able to show 200 messages after ignoring the shorties. That is an issue only in Newsville, as far as I know. Sometimes the junk comments are so numerous that the four viewable pages go back only a couple of hours. It would be nice to see more but it is not a big deal

And thanks for the photos. I posted a comment with a small suggestion but the change just as shown would be a big improvement.

Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:12,327
Points:2,100,125
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2013 12:38:19 AM


T42, the cutoff is exactly 60 characters including all spaces and punctuation. I tested it.
Profile Pic
teafortwo
Champion Author Washington

Posts:26,376
Points:1,867,235
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2013 5:32:28 PM


Thanks for the response TB ;0}

Testing:

12345678910 22345678920 32345678930 42345678940 52345678950 62345678960

Approximately 60. Give or take a bit for spaces and punctuation, etc ......
Profile Pic
TB
Moderator
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2013 4:52:13 PM

Hi Everyone

A few points on this change. As far as I know the ignore short messages will hide messages containing 60 characters or less. This can be adjusted by us in the future.

Second it would be very hard on our system to hide short messages and still give you 4 full pages of messages. The idea for this feature was more to hide the clutter so that members could have on going conversations with out having to scroll over the short messages.

As far as moving the "post a reply" to the bottom blue bar I have been trying this out. I posted 2 screen shots to an album on GB Here. If you would like to have a look at what this would look like.

We have never really moved this button around on the forum much so it would take a bit getting used to for some members which is why I am putting these screens up.

Let me know what you think in the comments for the photos.

Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,184
Points:763,780
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2013 3:23:48 AM


jrsva,
The Rising/Falling indicator is fine, on the home page; not at the top of the search results.

RE: do not like the Search Gas Prices section with all of the options shown;
What if you change it from Advanced to Basic in the Member Preferences?

RE: Report Gas Prices is collapsed by default; why not the Search section?
That's right, but now with the latest changes (color scheme & Ignore Short Messages) the search results has a full size Report Gas Prices box at the top of the page AND a Rising/Falling indicator.
Profile Pic
teafortwo
Champion Author Washington

Posts:26,376
Points:1,867,235
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2013 1:16:24 AM


Time will tell ...... ****** POOF ******

The site seems very glitchy tonight. I had a lot of trouble cashing in my points.
I find the front page prices hard to read.
That said, against the new soft colors, the bold ad colors really stand out. What a concept ;0}
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:22,921
Points:4,163,780
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 14, 2013 3:50:17 AM

DoctorV writes,
> I would have preferred that forum posts contain a minimum number of characters in order to post it

The result of such a change would *not* be that the fluff posters stop posting, nor that they would suddenly start posting meaningful messages. Rather, the result would be that they would post longer fluff -- and the end result would be worse than what we started with.

This is not just a guess. A similar change *was* in place for a few days, some years ago; and the results were as above. It also reflects the history of analogous changes -- for example, when Usenet tried to get people to stop quoting irrelevant blocks of text by requiring more new content than quoted content, people instead started adding automatic "filler lines" at the bottom.
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:12,327
Points:2,100,125
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Apr 14, 2013 12:50:40 AM

GGG, I like the Rising/Falling indicator. I do not like the Search Gas Prices section with all of the options shown; that’s what takes up a lot of space. If that feature could stay collapsed unless needed it would make the page more compact. Report Gas Prices is collapsed by default; why not the Search section?
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:12,327
Points:2,100,125
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Apr 14, 2013 12:41:09 AM


I just now tested the cutoff limit. A 60-character message is filtered out but 61 (including spaces) passes. I still think 40 would be better; you can say something useful in 60 characters.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,184
Points:763,780
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 11:53:02 PM


I noticed another change; when executing a Saved Search the results now have the rotating 'Price Is Rising/Stable/Falling' message and a Report Gas Prices box at the top of the page. Note that an ad-hoc search does not have those items at the top of the results page.

I liked it better before with less clutter so I can start reading the results of my saved search without scrolling so much.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,184
Points:763,780
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 11:43:49 PM


Seems there is still a bug to fix on this new Ignore Short Messages checkbox.

I agree with others that even 50 characters is too much. Just testing it on some other discussions it cut out some relevant responses. Most of what we complain about are the 'ok' type of responses and the filter should be set to just cover the very short responses like that. Even at 40 or 50 characters that can be a complete sentence.

The new color scheme on the Lowest/Highest gas prices list and search results are ugly. The new text in news stories is light gray instead of black and gives those pages a faded look that is harder to read. It all looks like GB is trying to mimic one of the color themes from windows vista.
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 7:21:40 PM

QUOTE :::How is a short message defined? One word? Two words?:::

Yup, any one word junk response is now blocked.

[Edited by: Hemond at 4/13/2013 7:22:39 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 7:19:55 PM

I tested it this morning and 60 characters or less would be blocked. However I just read a post over on the computer board where an expert just tested it with 50 spaces or less. He is a totally reliable source, and says the minimum has changed to 50 spaces. It was 60 earlier. I gotta test this now to verify.
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:6,943
Points:726,030
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 7:12:54 PM

I think someone tested it at 60 characters (including spaces?)
Profile Pic
ziyulu
Champion Author Austin

Posts:10,775
Points:2,089,700
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 7:01:00 PM

How is a short message defined? One word? Two words?
Profile Pic
Michael29644
Champion Author Greenville

Posts:6,939
Points:1,211,200
Joined:Jan 2011
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 1:13:06 PM

"5. (Not really related) Get rid of the ugly faded blue links; bring back bright blue links!
6. (Totally unrelated) Bring back the borders for the price tables; they look lost in white space."

Yeah, both of these two items were definite downgrades. I'd love to see them put back the way they were.
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:6,943
Points:726,030
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 1:07:36 PM

I think the check box is fine - but agree it should not count the hidden messages to the look back range - I will agree with that. But, if you try and prevent the short post, folks will just post longer trash to get accepted. The restriction on the number of pages to look back is a bit short for some areas.
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:4,378
Points:675,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 1:00:10 PM

TxJeans: "So DoctorV, what is wrong with the check box?"

It doesn't eliminate the problem, it just hides it. And if you hide the short messages, you don't get to see more longer ones, i.e., farther back in time. I wish you could set a forum preference to hide the short messages so that you didn't have to load the page first, then check the box.
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:12,327
Points:2,100,125
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 12:39:56 PM

Unfortunately, the “Ignore Short Messages” button does not allow the page to reload with 50 useful messages. In the Newsville topics there are often only a dozen or so comments left on a page after ignoring the junk, hence ignoring does not allow access to earlier comments. There may be only 40 or 50 comments left on the four viewable pages and these may go back only an hour or so in time.

Suggestions —
1. Reduce the cutoff slightly, maybe 40 characters.
2. Allow the page to reload so that there are still 50 messages per page after Ignore.
3. Allow the check box to be unchecked to remove the filter without closing the topic.
4. (Related) Move the “Post a Reply” to the blue bar below the OP, to the right of Ignore.
5. (Not really related) Get rid of the ugly faded blue links; bring back bright blue links!
6. (Totally unrelated) Bring back the borders for the price tables; they look lost in white space.

Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:6,943
Points:726,030
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 12:34:33 PM

So DoctorV, what is wrong with the check box? I think it is a good solution. I am not sure the filter should be set at 60 char, but willing to give it a try and see if we still feel it is too long after a few weeks.
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:4,378
Points:675,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 10:11:20 AM

Yes, exactly. So here you have to wade through pages of: "OK", "Ban ethanol!!!!!!!!!", "Speculators", "Greed", etc., just to find a few gems of thoughtful or informative posts. Hot topics quickly fill up with pages of this stuff and you miss out on anything good in the earlier posts. I swear, 90% of the posts on this forum must be submitted by cell phone because they are short and filled with spelling errors or incomplete sentences.
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 9:54:39 AM

QUOTE :::I would have preferred that forum posts contain a minimum number of characters in order to post it. Some other forums I participate in have that feature,:::


The problem with GB is people are only interested in getting the 5 posts daily for points. They have no interest in the topic. To get credit all you have to do is post a letter. 'y' counts for points.

You don't see this in any other forum online as they don't get points. If you are bothering to post on other forums, its because you have something to say.
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:4,378
Points:675,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 9:14:40 AM

I would have preferred that forum posts contain a minimum number of characters in order to post it. Some other forums I participate in have that feature, although I'm sure some here would just make up for it with exclamation points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:11,716
Points:170,845
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 8:57:23 AM

I just tested in my testing area. ANy post 60 characters or less is blocked.
Profile Pic
pupule777
Champion Author New Hampshire

Posts:2,364
Points:527,065
Joined:Jan 2013
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 8:43:22 AM

is the button your talking about in the upper RH cornor and just says "ignor" ?? if you hit that ignor button I just described what happens?? I've been wondering
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:6,943
Points:726,030
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 8:23:21 AM

jrsva, I think they did reduce the filter from 60 characters (didn't test myself, but others reported), to 50 if that is what your testing is showing.
Summary:
1. Adjust the filter a bit lower still (or selectable.
2. Make unchecking the check box clear the filter immediately.
3. Move the reply button to the same blue bar.

Now, how about that durable flag for dual priced stations and tying the price fields to the MSL??
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:12,327
Points:2,100,125
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2013 12:01:06 AM

Yes, nice feature but still in need of some work. After running several tests it appears that the cutoff is at 50 characters including spaces. That might be a little bit too high; some useful comments can be made in less than that but no big deal. Forty might be better.

It should be possible to uncheck the box and restore the short messages. As noted below, you have to leave and reenter the topic if you want to restore all messages.

And why wasn’t this opportunity taken to move the “Post a Reply” button out of the clutter of other links at the top and place it on the blue bar below the OP. This has been requested repeatedly and should be an easy fix.

Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:22,921
Points:4,163,780
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2013 11:49:44 PM

I'm somewhat surprised that this change got rolled out without first fixing the bug, since we'd already pointed it out when we came across the feature in pre-release.
Topic is locked Back to Topics