|
It would be helpful to have a Sort by option within the member articles:
- Section/Topic (default, current representation)
- Date Created Asc/Desc
- Date Modified Asc/Desc
- Popularity Asc/Desc
- Rating Asc/Desc
Cheers,
Jani Giannoudis
Meerazo.com - Resource Sharing Made Easy | Co-founder
|
|
|
|
|
In all the forums, the "New Message" button has been bugging me for a while, as it really creates a "First message in a new thread" and is not the only way, and often not even the right way, to create a new message.
A change of the button's text (maybe "Start a new discussion") might reduce the number of broken threads, where new members sometimes put a reply or a follow-up question in a new thread above the one holding the original question in the discussion forums.
|
|
|
|
|
The old "New Thread" was actually plain OK. And consistent with the "View Thread" link below.
Just to tell.
|
|
|
|
|
Except maybe for the fact not everyone knows what a thread is... IMO the shortest text seldom is the best.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Those looking to post a question may be confused by "Start a new discussion" (or better: "New Discussion". "Post a Question" would be more accurate for those, but this then precludes those looking to start a discussion, or merely post a message without any thought to having an actual discussion (eg admin message, rant etc). "New Message" is actually the most accurate since this is truly what's happening.
Maybe the solution is to make "Reply" larger.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Maybe the solution is to make "Reply" larger.
No it isn't. Under default conditions, "Reply" isn't even visible until a message gets opened.
Chris Maunder wrote: "New Message" is actually the most accurate
and the most misleading, the majority of forum messages are replies inside an existing thread. You seem to have missed the whole point and/or to apply "Lounge logic" to all the forums, we don't want rants in programming forums, do we?
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: "Reply" isn't even visible until a message gets opened.
Neither is the message, so if someone is posting a reply or a follow-up question (as you indicated in your initial message) then they have to have opened the message to read it.
Regardless, I understand what you're saying. We have the logic to set the default message type when posting a message, so how about I change the "New X" message to reflect what the default message type would be.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
If the button specifies the default type (say "New question message"), it will be confusing for those looking for a way to add something that isn't going to be a question. They can't know beforehand there will be a way to change the message type after they clicked the button that didn't match their intent. I know you don't like it much, however it would be better to have the default message type widget highlighted or blinking on the edit page until the user confirms or changes it.
|
|
|
|
|
How's this?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
ugly and irrelevant.
When the message one wants to reply to is open, people are likely to do things correctly.
It is when they leave the message or the page, maybe experiment a bit, look up something, who knows, and then finally return to the forum that some seem inclined to just hit "New Message" and post a reply to the last thing they can remember from the forum. That is what you should try and improve on, hence the suggestion to make the button's text less confusing: not every new message should go where the "New Message" button leads.
|
|
|
|
|
Your suggestion was to change the text to "New Discussion". I pointed out that that isn't accurate all of the time, and offered to change it to New [insert default message type] for the forum. You then countered with "highlight the message type". I was assuming you had dropped the idea of changing the New button text.
If, however, the problem is actually the one you mentioned here:
Quote: leave the message or the page, maybe experiment a bit, look up something, who knows, and then finally return to the forum that some seem inclined to just hit "New Message" and post a reply to the last thing they can remember from the forum.
then I don't see how changing the wording of anything will help. What you actually want is for the relevant message they were viewing when they left the forum to be open, and for the most prominent button to be "Reply to this message" button.
I'm open to suggestions on how to do this. Auto-save their last opened message when they leave?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
fact: not every new message should go where the "New Message" button leads
conclusion: the wording is bad.
suggestions: change the text, use other words, use more words, add an explanation, add a flow chart, do whatever it takes to no longer misguide innocent new users.
that is what I said here[^], before you started maundering.
|
|
|
|
|
the message type for the "new message" (i.e. a thread opener) one adds to an article's forum defaults to "question", whereas quite often (or even mostly) the content is an appreciation, a comment, a suggestion, and not a question at all.
So I'd suggest it defaults to "answer" which is closer to reality, and also implies lots of Authority points, rather than a measly Enquirer point. In fact, I guess it is due to this that I've gotten many more Enquirer points than I ever deserved.
modified 6-Mar-12 0:40am.
|
|
|
|
|
I do not agree that a post that says "thank you" is an answer. It's a comment.
It used to default to just "General", but then authors were frustrated that when members posted questions and they answered, they weren't getting the "Authority" points they deserved because members weren't changing the message type to "question" and the author wasn't, in turn, setting "Answer" as their message type.
Now if everyone did what they were supposed to do...
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
While composing a message for the forum of an article, one cannot see, nor easily reach, the article, making it harder than necessary to compose, formulate well, and quote. Not sure it used to be different, however I came to appreciate the "view" widget available on discussion forums, so I'd suggest something similar for articles.
modified 6-Mar-12 0:38am.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're under FF, I'd recommand CPHog.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the suggestion however I stopped using FF, it had too many memory leaks to keep it open for a few hours.
And I'm not fond of adding helper code from another source, IMO if CPHog or anything else improves the CP UX, then CP should incorporate it and offer its functionality to everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
I also switched to Chrome recently for the same reasons. I have to use FF at work though.
I am not sure all CPHog functionalities can be implemented for other browsers. It is a greasemonkey script, so ...
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: Thanks for the suggestion however I stopped using FF, it had too many memory leaks to keep it open for a few hours.
Me too after you. Thanks for suggestion.
thatrajaNobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone 
|
|
|
|
|
The "View" link goes to the message to which you are replying, but I will see how easy it is to add a link to the original item when posting a new message. Or question. Or discussion. Or whatever it is the current member wishes to do 
[Edit: the link has been added]
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
modified 6-Mar-12 16:30pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It appears as Deleted to me.
Sounds like caching.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Today I found some members posted a question(s) as a new article. Also this one[^] abusing the new submission wizard. So before submission validate the length(of content) to avoid these.
thatrajaNobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone
|
|
|
|
|
Look at this article, for example. The code sections look like this. How to fix this?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
