Topic: Little things that bug you/me about the forum (Read 2658 times)

You did well coming up with this thread. I'm just thinking if this thread can be pinned because the it holds a potential that would optimize continues reviews and adjust of the forum interfaces.
If pinned, everyone in the Meta section would obviously see it through and contributes if need be.
As for me, I think the "Search Functionality" isn't interference enough for quick or easier locations of search results.
So I'm on the opinion if this domain can be enhanced with keywords especially for convenient and friendly notation of existed threads in the forum when using the search function.

To add to our earlier discussion on custom Trust lists: it would be good to have a "add/remove to Trust list"-link in each user's profile. Although that may mean people are even more likely to add people for the wrong reasons.

When I posted within a second, it tells me "less than 10 seconds ago". When I waited a few seconds, it still says "less than 10 seconds". A few seconds later, I could post this.
(14-(191/50))=10.18. That seems about right. I could probably have posted a second earlier.

I'll test-click this in 2 windows as quickly as I can.

No, it hasn't. (But, I plan to send theymos a summary of all the outstanding patches at some point. Hopefully that'll help. I think that a few of them are just waiting on theymos to come into enough free time for him to be able to really sit down and focus. Right now, theymos and I have a pretty stupid relationship... I'm often blocked on the thing that he has in abundance: access, and he's often blocked on the thing that I have in abundance: bandwidth. At some point, we'll figure out some compromise that makes better use of both of us.)

---

Yep, I noticed the "Implement stabbing" topic. (I was working on a response to do with superconducting loops, quantum states, and just how unreliable a face-stabbing implementation in PHP would be, but, yeah... I ran out of energy after considering my wife's constant warnings about my deadpan sense of humor being very hit-or-miss with most people.)

At some point I'm going to (try to) convince theymos to let me replace the whole ignore system, and when I get around to that, I'll think carefully about how to lay things out so that these kinds of suggestions can be looked into (that is, suggestions that depend on the availability of ignore-related statistics).

---

I've got a few ideas (and some guesses about why the previous approach didn't scale), but, I'm not going to put my thinking cap on just yet.

---

Hmm... I wonder if that pseudocode is still correct? (Only theymos would know, but, I've been bugging him a lot lately, so I'm not going to PM him for a while.)

I mean, one thing that occurs to me is to replace all of that with something simpler:


Then, instead of it looking like this (red is when activity is < 15, blue is when it's >= 15 and < 60, green is when it's >= 60 and < 100, and purple is when it's >= 100):



It would look like this:



(That way, the important features are matched, and, with that cast-to-int truncation, the wait-time would become 1 second once activity is > 1000.)

I understand. Doing it this way kind of makes 4 seconds seem like a long time.

But, honestly, I believe that this limitation goes beyond the simple user level. At lower levels, I believe this could be a feature used to minimize spam and the like. Afterwards, the limitation becomes aimed at controlling the flow on the server and avoiding underloads.

Honestly, I don't remember any forum - and I've been to several, some as moderator, and there are no time limitations between posts. There is always some limit. And the limit cannot be 1 second, because that is not a limit. 

You are right. Just edited the previous post.
If that red part is removed, users will need to have more than 500 activity, so that they can post, report, send pm or search more than once in less than 4 seconds.

They'll still need to deal with "14-(activity/50)", so 100 Activity gives a 12 second delay, 700 Activity gives 0 seconds delay, and more Activity just made me realize this value shouldn't become negative so the "4 max" should change into "1" or "0".

That would be ideal

It may worth mentioning that seaching and sending pms are also counted as posting.
If that red part is removed, users with activity of bigger than 99 500 will be able to use forum search engine multiple times and send multiple pms in less than 4 seconds.

I think the better solution is to change the code, so that reporting isn't counted as posting.

It's barely a problem while making normal posts. That only happens when I create multiple posts, and then click "Post" to post them all. That's a limitation I can live with.

I hit this (often) while reporting spam. On loyce.club/badposts/spam.html, I click "report" with my middle mouse button (to open them in a new tab), then go through the tabs to report them.

So the problem is the post delay is also used as a Report delay. Merit doesn't have that delay, I can Merit 4 posts within the same second (and I've done that many times, but never reached 5). I'd like to have "unlimited reporting".

I realize that you are a machine, but making posts in less than 4 seconds makes you almost super machine. 

I think 4 seconds is a minimum reasonable time for posts made by humans, in order to avoid bots and spam from overloading the server. I realize that some tasks can be very quick to carry out, and this limit can come up against this speed. Despite realizing this situation, I don't think it is very viable for the forum to reduce this value even further. Even if it is exclusive to users with many merits and activity.

I hit it again while reporting spam:

Reporting counts as posting. I think deleting the red parts would solve it (I had to replace code tags by quote tags to make it visible).

It was sort of tried before, maybe there is a new way to approach it that would be less resource intensive?

This could be fun:

Well, my idea was in that case. If it's complicated, that's it, we continue working with what we have. 

By the way, regarding the patch you mentioned, it hasn't been implemented yet, has it?

Hmm... Do you want the background color to affect just the cell's contents, or the whole extent of the cell?

If it's the former (the cell's contents), then I did a patch some time ago to clean up the [glow] tag. It basically turns the [glow] tag (in a backward-compatible way) into something that always gets converted into a with a style="background-color: $color;" on it, so it doesn't need the extra parameters that the previous [glow] tag used.

With it, you could write your example like this:


If it's the latter (the cell's extent), then that's much trickier. I spent a few hours (before giving up in frustration) trying to get the BBCode parser to correctly handle something like [td bgcolor=#e0e0e0]. At first glance, that would seem to be a very simple job, but there are a ton of strange interactions in the parse_bbc function (including one between descriptors with both a parameters key and a require_parents key). I can get close, but I can't shake out all the bugs without making deeper changes to that function. Probably it's down to that code being hacked on by different programmers at different times, but the BBCode parser in its current state is a very fragile, barely working POS.

Still writing the code manually? I use GPT to write bbcodes from google spreadsheet. It generated within seconds.

like with this code I can generate any bbcode from my google spreadsheets

Yes, this could be an interesting solution. It involves more BBCode, but ends up being minimally efficient.

The way I suggested could also be different, with a more appropriate tag. But, it could be a way to create more dynamism in the tables on the forum.

It will help to make table formatting more easily.

Like this table format used by irfan_pak10, it is good visually but when you come to code block, it is complicated, so if your suggestion can make formatting with colors, background colors in tables more easily, I strongly support it.

[Translators] List of Bitcointalk Translators
Visually

@PowerGlove do you think it would be possible to set up something like this to work on tables?