|
We launched these two features a week ago. Is anyone seeing any issues, have any comments, or have any suggestions on changes you'd like to see made?
The bigger question is: are you using it, or possibly: did you even notice it.
It's a subtle visual change that hides a massive change underneath.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed the blue "follow" button that appears everywhere, but to be honest... no need of it
About the read later... didn't notice it.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Read later I'm going to use, but I think I will unfollow what I have followed.
The difference between: "Chris Maunder has posted a reply to a message at..." and "Chris Maunder has posted a reply to your message at..." is a bit to small for my taste.
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: The difference between: "Chris Maunder has posted a reply to a message at..." and "Chris Maunder has posted a reply to your message at..." is a bit to small for my taste.
There's not really meant to be any difference there.
The use cases we (internally) wanted were
- following an individual member so you could see all their posts and articles
- following a contest so you can see the entries as they are posted
- following some forums (eg the Soapbox, suggestions and lounge) instead of the fixed set we were previously showing
- Following a specific set of tags so I could really narrow down the focus of my homepage feed
- Following a specific article so each time it was updated I'd see it.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote:
There's not really meant to be any difference there.
I understand that, but I'd prefer if there was one.
When I get a reply in my mail for something I have written myself, there is normally no problems following the conversation.
But when it's an answer to what someone else has written I'm totally lost at what it's about, which means I'm not knowing what the importance is until I've checked the thread.
If I on the other hand can see that it obviously isn't a response directly to me, it won't trigger my "OCD".
|
|
|
|
|
I started to use that for a few articles, and I kind of like it.
I noted a small bug, though: when you follow the same article several times, you get 2 reputation points each time. I think reputation points should be awarded only once per article.
"I'm neither for nor against, on the contrary." John Middle
|
|
|
|
|
I think there shouldn't be any reputations points for the follower, if... and only if... just for the followed, since it triggered some interest on people.
But just klicking "follow"? I don't think is needed.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, there isn't really a need for reputations points on such a trivial action. But, system is done like that: you get reputation points when you log in, when you post, when you answer, comment, bookmark, etc.
That can be discussed; however, I think this is not the subject here; whatever the opinions, one should certainly not be awarded points several times for the very same action.
"I'm neither for nor against, on the contrary." John Middle
|
|
|
|
|
I know I'm not the brightest person here, but I cannot for the life of me find "Read Later". And to save embarrassment to anyone else who can't find it you can make me look stupid by pointing it out (even with a "duh" attached).
[edit]
Found it, thanks to a kind co-member.
[/edit]
modified 17-Feb-18 5:26am.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: know I'm not the brightest person here, but I cannot for the life of me find "Read Later".
You're not the dimmest bulb either. If you can't find it we have an issue.
Any suggestions on how to make it more obvious? Two things are coming
1. The button will go in articles
2. A link will be added to article listings in emails.
Anything else?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Now I know where to find it it seems obvious.
However, I think it could be brighter or more 'contrasty', in a manner similar to the Follow button. In articles if it is up in the top right corner with the others then I am sure it will be fine.
1. & 2. Sound a great idea.
|
|
|
|
|
It was not the case 30 minutes ago; now we cannot see posters names on questions and answers anymore.
"I'm neither for nor against, on the contrary." John Middle
|
|
|
|
|
This is by design[^] (and those who answer now have their name shown)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, I'm fine with that. Thanks 
"I'm neither for nor against, on the contrary." John Middle
|
|
|
|
|
Good idea but now spammers can post anonymously and there is not a way of reporting the user.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
If that turns out to be an issue we'll find a solution
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
It's an issue:
 No way to find out who posted it, so the spammer cannot be reported.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Hover over the report "shield" and let me know if that helps.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have a "shield", just a flag:
And "hover" is an entertaining problem on a tablet! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
After you report you get to see who you reported.
OriginalGriff wrote: And "hover" is an entertaining problem on a tablet
Try tapping. (He says, having not tested it, and blindly hoping and praying).
If it doesn't work as expected* then I'll fix.
*CodeProject reserves the right to reject your reality and replace it with one of their choosing.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I'll try it - but it'll have to wait for spam to arrive. Shouldn't be long...
I'll let you know how it goes on PC, WookieTab, and Android, if I can.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It is already an issue, as shown in Spam in QA - closed[^].
And it also means we cannot check when someone reposts the same question multiple times, or for other reasons we may wish to look at their previous posts.
|
|
|
|
|
In my point of view, it is an issue.
I used to use the member profile and questions history to detect many kind of abuses like:
- Repost of questions.
- Vampires: "Why I get error with 'IF' in my C program" after they already asked 96 questions.
- Spammers
- Member of the day: hint that it is homework
...
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Let me get this straight, MY name as a question answerer is being displayed but the posters name is not being displayed?
Oh no it's not.
|
|
|
|
|
The person who asks the question is not mentioned in the question. The person who takes the time to answer is question is shown for credit where credit is due.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
