| ??? 03/14/08 20:20 Read: times |
#152267 - it is not easy ... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Craig Steiner said:
Richard Erlacher said:
So many posts, particularly by beginners, are posted with vastly insufficient detail. Perhaps there should be a hold status for those that would prevent additional comment until sufficient detail is presented. We already have that ability, but Steve or I have to moderate the thread as such. When that happens a little stoplight appears which prevents additional posts from being added until the original poster adds a new message. Yes, I was aware of that, but it requires moderator intervention. If there were a number of general categories, selection of at least one of which would be mandatory, but including a "general" category to be examined by a moderator before posting (to serve as a disincentive to hasty and poorly thought-out posts hoping to get tomorrow's homework done by someone else ... at the moderator's convenience, of course), it might be useful for indexing posts for subsequent searches. Moreover, if it allowed only one category to be checked, it might encourage separate posts for separate problems. Management of the title/subject would be very helpful, too, as quite a few threads have contained useful information, though neigher the title of the individual post nor the thread title, has hinted at the true subject. Perhaps cross-linking some posts to other subjects, since they may touch on useful information despite the subject, would be useful. Maybe even a mandatory category selection (from a list) before opening a new thread would help, particularly if it forced a search of "prior art" before posting. Perhaps I could give them a list of checkboxes of topics contained in the message. But would it actually be used? Yes, that might work, and, perhaps, that could provide a means for post-selecting the categories when the original post was about category "A" but the subject contains useful information about category "B" that needs to appear in searches. Given that you could have category searches, that might be a shorter, simpler, faster search, albeit a more superficial one, that one could use to find information about an entire category without matching key words. One other thing I've noticed from time to time is that there seems to be no "universal" way to include a schematic as part of a post. I've had to put mine in a PDF and add it to my user page, which takes quite a bit of time. I realize that drawing a schematic takes time, too, but there ought to be a way to put a JPG or BMP or something directly into a post so it doesn't clutter the user-page with seldom-interesting material. I plan on doing this, but it will probably be after the new version is first deployed. Who knows, I might get ambitious and include it in the new site from day one. This site is a lot more massive and has a lot more code behind it than I remembered when I first embarked on the new version. :| Regards, Craig Steiner It's always more work than one thinks at the outset. I've encountered very few tasks that were actually smaller than I initially guessed. RE |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| New Forum: Opinions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| constructive criticism | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Public | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| no score | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| disagree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What good has it done to members till date | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not quite what I meant | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| perhaps another category ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Feature already exists | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| it is not easy ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Categories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keep It Simple & Stupid, please. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Do you think that's a good thing? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That will be fixed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Something to absolutely avoid | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Already there | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| hiding scores | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Bug | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "Next Page", "Previous Page" links | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| just stumbled on this one | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Subjective | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I do not insist on the phrase ... | 01/01/70 00:00 |