|
A thread starting question (or even any message in a thread), once it has gotten one or more replies, should either not offer a "remove" widget at all, or its function should be altered so only " [removed]" gets added to the subject line, leaving the body intact, rather than mutilate the entire thread.
example[^]
PS: IMO it is also pretty weird to show a "bookmark" widget on a removed message; "View Thread" still makes some sense, assuming the replies can still make an interesting read.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
modified on Tuesday, January 11, 2011 4:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
We can't stop someone removing a message if someone else has replied to it. The other option is to someone who starts a thread the ability to delete the entire thread if they decide to remove their post. This too is unacceptable.
I can remove the bookmark link, obviously, but I'm not sure it really hurts to have it there.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
There are sites where removing/emptying the question upon completion is the norm. AFAIK CP isn't one of them.
A lot of enquirers see the "remove" widget and click it, rather than marking things "SOLVED" or "DONE" or something.
Having the widget available is an invitation that is contrary to what we want (except when no replies are present).
Yes they could still empty the question, that is however slightly more difficult than clicking a widget.
New suggestion:
1. show the "remove" widget for any leaf message in a thread, i.e. any message without one or more replies; do not show it as soon as (or as long as) some replies are present.
2. for the starting message (the question), as soon as at least one reply is present, show a "thread is done" widget, which appends " [done]" to the subject line , and does not alter the body text. "done" covers solved, gave up, no longer interested, what have you; it still allows people to add replies, edit them, vote, bookmark and everything.
I think this will mostly stop the behavior from other sites rippling into ours: people will not click a "remove" (it isn't there any more), and will prefer clicking the "thread is done" widget over selecting and clearing its entire content.
This must be a winner: those that empty will continue to do so, those that remove today are expected to mark "done" tomorrow.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: We can't stop someone removing a message if someone else has replied to it.
Not sure what you mean here.
Is it: we really should not prevent removal. then why? the author can modify and even empty his message if he must.
Or is it: he can empty his message, there is nothing we can do about that. then yes, that is fine by me.
Here is yet another one; if you don't take action, the forums will soon be full of those.
today's example [^]
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
We should not prevent an author from removing their own content. As you say - he can simply remove the content if he wishes. I'd rather have a placeholder that keeps the tree structure intact than have the rash of "why is the tree structure all messed up in the forums" questions (the very motivation that lead me to leave the placeholder there when an author deleted the question)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I am afraid you are still misreading me. please read carefully.
I don't want to disrupt the tree structure.
I don't want to prevent an author ro modify or even clear one of his messages (I do hope he won't clear though).
However I don't want to encourage an author to remove his message when it has replies, which is what your "remove" widget does, it does facilitate and encourage removal. And removal happens frequently on the top-level message by authors who want to close the thread, most often because the thread has served its purpose (this is how some other forums expect a user to behave).
Therefore I would not show a "remove" widget on messages that have replies. So the author can still edit and clear them, however he no longer can remove their content with a simple click.
And I would show a "thread is done" widget on the top-level message when it has replies (if no replies, it still has the "remove" widget). So the author who wants to close his thread will see the invitation to mark the tread as done, and the net result would then be:
- the subject line gets a " [done]" appended,
- the message remains intact
leaving the entire thread in a much better shape, still perfectly useful for future readers.
I hope I made myself clear now.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
I understood you, but was replying only to your specific post. I haven't had a chance to think fully through the previous post - whose sentiments I agree with.
One thing I was thinking about was a "close thread" button (essentially your "thread is done" button)
If I remove the "delete" button then I'll get endless questions about why messages sometimes do, and sometimes don't have a delete button, with many members feeling it's a seemingly random event (yes, I know it should be obvious, but it won't be to first timers)
There's a further issue: What does the "thread is done" button do? Prevent further answers from being posted? What if there is a great discussion going on in a thread and the original poster closes the thread thus stiffling the active discussion? I don't think that's fair or encouraging.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: what does "thread is done" button do?
nothing much, basically it does two things:
1. it lures the enquirer into clicking it rather than clearing the question;
2. when clicked it adds " [done]" to the subject line.
That is all it does. People can continue to vote, bookmark, reply, what have you.
And that is why I didn't use the word close.
And the "remove" presence should be obvious: leaf is removable, non-leaf isn't.
If you doubt the intuitiveness, do it the other way: have a "remove" widget everywhere, and when clicked for a non-leaf, pop up a message box "sorry, you can't remove a message that has replies attached to it" (I bet you'll get some comments "hey, joker, why do you give us such a widget then?" which is what we get already when replying "please don't remove").
As always, you can choose your pain.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: As always, you can choose your pain
Never a more true word spoken.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 posts and 0 questions. How did you run into him/her?
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: 0 posts and 0 questions. How did you run into him/her?
He was looking for just any bastard.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing it's related to the -7 author points.
|
|
|
|
|
Does that mean they've deleted 7 articles?
|
|
|
|
|
No. Could mean many things. My guess is the author posted a tip/trick, it got downvoted a few times, and the tip/trick was deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
Article and Tip/Trick needing approval.
I must get a clever new signature for 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
They're cousins from across the pond to the Fockers.
|
|
|
|
|
In Australia that's perfectly acceptable. However, if there are complaints I'll ask politely for a change.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: In Australia that's perfectly acceptable.
I'm happy content with that.
I must get a clever new signature for 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
This page seems to be unvailable for all my articles ??
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/Statistics.aspx?aid=37768
or
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/Statistics.aspx?aid=104937
|
|
|
|
|
this bug has been fixed a couple of days ago. apparently not.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Apparantly yes (at least now). Just a missing control.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm fairly sure it was me who just uploaded the missing control file 2 minutes ago (the original issue was because that file was missing, and in the upgrade last night that file - due to an incorrect datestamp - was missing again - so I manually uploaded)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
