Pages:
Author

Topic: Member filtering widget [◇/◈] (SMF patch) (Read 556 times)

hero member
Activity: 510
Merit: 4005
November 04, 2022, 03:38:03 PM
#24
(assuming D is what theymos chooses). Wink
Assuming theymos accept the patch at all.  Wink
That's a bit of an unfortunate snip, because my wink was meant to imply warmness towards everyone who participated in this thread, and now it looks like I was trying to insinuate that I know what theymos might be thinking or what he'll do (which I obviously don't). I'm a "warm" winker, not a "cheeky" winker. Cheesy

Still, it's a great initiative, @PowerGlove, and It's great that you've designed something to help make Bitcointalk a better place. It's not a trivial amount of work. I hope that the patch, if it is accepted by theymos, will be implemented into the forum software.
Thanks. I hope so, too. Wink
hero member
Activity: 1456
Merit: 940
🇺🇦 Glory to Ukraine!
(assuming D is what theymos chooses). Wink

Assuming theymos accept the patch at all.  Wink

Still, it's a great initiative, @PowerGlove, and It's great that you've designed something to help make Bitcointalk a better place. It's not a trivial amount of work. I hope that the patch, if it is accepted by theymos, will be implemented into the forum software.
hero member
Activity: 510
Merit: 4005
Okay, I've sent the updated patch to theymos (with multi-filtering + an improved version of placement D). The first patch I sent him included placement A, this one includes the most voted-for placement and the remaining two placements (B & C) are easy to extrapolate. I tweaked placement D a bit and think it looks much better (widget is now gray to "separate" it a little more from the username and it has better sizing and improved alignment). I didn't think it was worth putting it to another vote because the adjustments are probably too small for most people to care about, anyway. LoyceV voted for D but mentioned reservations about appearance, so hopefully these small tweaks will satisfy him (assuming D is what theymos chooses). Wink
legendary
Activity: 2800
Merit: 2736
Farewell LEO: o_e_l_e_o
Okay, I went ahead and finished the work for Path 2, so multi-filtering will be available for the people that know how to get to it. Wink
Go ahead my man. You are doing huge favour to this forum. The 10 years old forum design needs some feature to make it interesting LOL
hero member
Activity: 510
Merit: 4005
I vote for placement B or placement D. As I suggested before, this control is related to the user, so if we continue to follow the logic of the existing SMF interface, all controls and information related to the user should be in the left side of the interface. The right side is for posts and post-related controls.
Yep, I think many will agree with you, but one counter-argument to the distinction that you're making (user-centric vs. post-centric) is that this widget is actually a little of both. It's user-centric because it filters by user, but it's post-centric because the specific post you're on when you click it plays a role (see: the example near the top of the initial post about the 100 page thread). It's a bit subtle, because it leans user-centric when you click on it initially, but post-centric when you click on it again. So, I think an argument can be made for putting it basically anywhere.

and a big THANK YOU for your work on this, wherever it goes.
Thanks, man. I appreciate that!

Quote
One thing worth considering, is that if theymos does end up accepting this patch, then I'd also like to add the same feature to the PM page! Smiley
That would be GREAT! The only way to search for messages from a certain user is to search for a common character ("e") from that user. With hundreds of pages, it would be very convenient to only show messages from the user I'm looking for.
Yep, implementing this for PMs is next on my list! When I had the idea, I was mightily impressed with myself, so I'm glad that someone else is excited about it, too! Cool

Some thoughts on placement

I'm not that fond of placement B, both because of what I said earlier (it moves around depending on post height) and because I'd like to add this feature to PMs too (at some point, not now) and there's no "Ignore" link there (unless I'm missing it), so there'd be a slight asymmetry when using the feature on a post vs. on a message (i.e. it would be next to "Ignore" on a post but just kind of floating around on a message). Placement C has the same problem (but in a different way, there's already a checkbox at the top-right of PMs).

I do like placement D, it's logical and it would work equally well for PMs, but it's pretty "flashy" putting a big ol' [I've since made it smaller] diamond next to everyone's name, so I'm concerned that theymos might think it's a little too disruptive.

Placement A is kind of discreet and also works well for PMs (i.e. next to "Report To Admin", in that case). It's also not that illogical, once you consider what I said above to @Stalker22.

Thanks for participating everyone, I think I'll let this thread soak for a bit, in case anybody else wants to cast their vote on placement, and then I'll send the (hopefully final) patch to theymos!
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
Placement D

This puts the widget next to the poster's name, like so:
I vote for this one. I don't particularly like how it looks next to the username, but the location makes most sense.

Quote
One thing worth considering, is that if theymos does end up accepting this patch, then I'd also like to add the same feature to the PM page! Smiley
That would be GREAT! The only way to search for messages from a certain user is to search for a common character ("e") from that user. With hundreds of pages, it would be very convenient to only show messages from the user I'm looking for.
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1359
I vote for placement B or placement D. As I suggested before, this control is related to the user, so if we continue to follow the logic of the existing SMF interface, all controls and information related to the user should be in the left side of the interface. The right side is for posts and post-related controls.
legendary
Activity: 4354
Merit: 3614
what is this "brake pedal" you speak of?
after seeing placement D, next to the user name looks best. kinda makes sense logically too putting it next to the thing it controls.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Placement B

This puts the widget next to "Ignore", like so:
I like this Placement B the most, out of all the options you presented.
The one I mentioned before could be confused and wrongly connected with moderator reports, and Placement C could be wrongly interpreted to have some connection with merits in upper right angle.
One option you didn't mention was putting small diamond next to the username, if that is even possible, but like I said Placement B is also fine.
hero member
Activity: 510
Merit: 4005
Path 1: Votes = 1 (@BitcoinGirl.Club)

Path 2: Votes = 3 (@LoyceV, @vapourminer, @dkbit98)

Path 3: Votes = 0

I'm relieved nobody voted for Path 3. Smiley

Okay, I went ahead and finished the work for Path 2, so multi-filtering will be available for the people that know how to get to it. Wink

Before I send theymos the updated patch, I'd like some more people to share their thoughts on the placement of the widget.

I've changed the spacing a little bit compared to the initial post. Using a longer example (to emphasize how things move with post height), which of the following four placements do you guys prefer?

Placement A

This puts the widget next to "Report to moderator", like so:



Placement B

This puts the widget next to "Ignore", like so:



Placement C

This puts the widget next to the post counter, like so:



Placement D

This puts the widget next to the poster's name, like so:



Edit: I added a fourth option, based on @dkbit98's suggestion.

Further edit: I reduced the size of the diamond in placement D, because the first attempt was quite a bit bigger than the other placements and was lifting the name a little too high. I think the smaller diamond is much less conspicuous than the first attempt, which is a good thing (I think) because people have gotten used to how their names are displayed and messing with that too much is probably ill-advised.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
I've sent the code to theymos. As always, feedback from anyone about this proposed feature is appreciated (but, please consider my thoughts: here). If discussion leads to new/better ideas, I'll obviously consider incorporating them, and will then send theymos an updated patch.
I like this idea more than last suggestion you made with arrows.
This is more simple to use and I think it would have use case among members including me, and if code changes are not drastic theymos should really implement this patch.
One thing I don't like is having diamond next to Report to moderator button, that can confuse some members, so I would move it to different location if possible.

Path 2: Change the patch so that it "technically" works (i.e. if you manually edit the URL and give "u=" a list, it'll do what's expected) but leave the UI the way it is. That'll mean that only tech-savvy members can do multi-filtering. Tackle the UI for multi-filtering at a later date.
Path 2 sounds good to me, but it's more important what path will theymos like more Wink

legendary
Activity: 4354
Merit: 3614
what is this "brake pedal" you speak of?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and suggestions, everybody! Smiley

Path 1: Leave the patch the way it is for now, and tackle multi-filtering at a later date.

Path 2: Change the patch so that it "technically" works (i.e. if you manually edit the URL and give "u=" a list, it'll do what's expected) but leave the UI the way it is. That'll mean that only tech-savvy members can do multi-filtering. Tackle the UI for multi-filtering at a later date.

Path 3: Spend the time now to get the whole shebang working (functionality and UI).

I'm not strongly opposed to Path 3 but I am a little reluctant. If a consensus forms around the idea that Path 3 is the way forward then I'll totally roll up my sleeves and get to work, but personally, I'm inclined towards Path 2; that way, we get a pretty cool feature right away (assuming theymos likes the patch) but the infrastructure for multi-filtering will be in place for a later attempt to come up with a sensible UI for it. What do you guys think?

path 2 sounds good. edit the url to add/edit a couple numbers in exchange for all that function we get ? even if it never went further than that (ie no UI) it still be a very useful tool.

for sure i would hit up old threads using that soon as it came out. as following the more iconic/famous threads from this new angle could be very informative.

and a big THANK YOU for your work on this, wherever it goes.
legendary
Activity: 2800
Merit: 2736
Farewell LEO: o_e_l_e_o
Path 1: Leave the patch the way it is for now
Good work again OP. I will suggest to keep it minimal as the bot (😉) already suggested.
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
Path 2: Change the patch so that it "technically" works (i.e. if you manually edit the URL and give "u=" a list, it'll do what's expected) but leave the UI the way it is. That'll mean that only tech-savvy members can do multi-filtering. Tackle the UI for multi-filtering at a later date.
I think what got (OP) patched so quickly, is that it's a very small change to the UI. I prefer to keep changes minimal.
hero member
Activity: 510
Merit: 4005
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and suggestions, everybody! Smiley

Placement of the widget

I can see the logic in having the widget next to "Ignore" like @Stalker22 suggested. I slightly prefer it where it is but I don't have a convincing argument for it, only that I like how "Report to moderator" is always pegged to the bottom-right and I don't like how "Ignore" moves around depending on the height of the post. How does everyone else feel about the placement? Should it go next to "Report to moderator", next to "Ignore" or somewhere else?

Filtering more than one member

I like @tranthidung's suggestion of being able to multi-filter. This actually came up during development, because when I proudly showed my pooky wooky how this feature works, literally the first question out of her mouth was: "Does it work for more than one person?". Cheesy

Technically, it's quite easy to support this (by making the "u=" parameter take a comma-separated list). Coming up with a sensible UI is a bit more tricky. Something like what @Stalker22 suggested (separate checkbox and on/off link) is likely the way to do it, but there are a few subtleties that I think would take a fair amount of effort to resolve.

I can see three paths for multi-filtering:

Path 1: Leave the patch the way it is for now, and tackle multi-filtering at a later date.

Path 2: Change the patch so that it "technically" works (i.e. if you manually edit the URL and give "u=" a list, it'll do what's expected) but leave the UI the way it is. That'll mean that only tech-savvy members can do multi-filtering. Tackle the UI for multi-filtering at a later date.

Path 3: Spend the time now to get the whole shebang working (functionality and UI).

I'm not strongly opposed to Path 3 but I am a little reluctant. If a consensus forms around the idea that Path 3 is the way forward then I'll totally roll up my sleeves and get to work, but personally, I'm inclined towards Path 2; that way, we get a pretty cool feature right away (assuming theymos likes the patch) but the infrastructure for multi-filtering will be in place for a later attempt to come up with a sensible UI for it. What do you guys think?
legendary
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1089
Goodnight, o_e_l_e_o 🌹
I like it, this can be useful.

Could you customize your patch to filter only discussions between two posters?
Any idea how that can easily be implemented in the GUI?

Maybe using a checkbox and a text link. Something like this:



Users can select multiple members using the checkbox, and the filter is activated only after clicking on the link.
Nice idea and if it works, it means that it can show more than two users. It could show as many users as selected. That will be a great feature.
For instance, if I meet a topic at the 5 pages and above and I know too well that LoyceV, o_e_l_e_o and PowerGlobeve are the people with great ideas about that particular topic, I may decide to filter posts by only them in the thread which will definitely reduce the number of pages to one.

An implementation to filter according to the number of merits earned in that very thread would be great also.
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1228
Playgram - The Telegram Casino
Anyway, I really appreciate your ideas and proposals to add new features to the forum, but I'm really looking forward to it and adapting it on Epochtalk because for now I'm very comfortable with the overall look of the forum. I also know this will come in handy, of course when I really want to review some post to report to moderator made by certain users.

But as long as Epochtalk hasn't launched yet, then some upgrades are needed for the forum too, I guess. The current look of the forum has changed as I applied several extension, but this must be because it is based on my needs.

legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1359
I like it, this can be useful.

Could you customize your patch to filter only discussions between two posters?
Any idea how that can easily be implemented in the GUI?

Maybe using a checkbox and a text link. Something like this:



Users can select multiple members using the checkbox, and the filter is activated only after clicking on the link.
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
I like it, this can be useful.

Could you customize your patch to filter only discussions between two posters?
Any idea how that can easily be implemented in the GUI?
hero member
Activity: 1554
Merit: 880
Notify wallet transaction @txnNotifierBot
As a refresher, that proposal was to add a pair of arrows to each post to easily skip to the next/previous post by the same member within a topic. Personally, I would appreciate a feature like that, because I've found that responding to someone's post without first having read their other posts in that topic, frequently leads to frustratingly redundant exchanges. Other members have expressed different reasons for wanting a feature like that, so I believe it to be a generally useful idea.
We can easily check the each post of a single user in a topic through Ninjastic.space. It isn't complicated thing to use this feature on Ninjastic. We need to use the 'Author name' and 'Topic ID' to see all posts by the user in a topic. Moreover, Ninjastic.space has few more advance options in their search feature.
This is the check mate move for this suggestion unless it also hides in the user post history. I actually see this feature on modern forum software, this feature usually use for privacy purposes in a post. It uses hideuser tag
Code:
[HIDEUSER=profile_id]
message_here
[/HIDEUSER]
But for the current system it cannot be used for that purpose.
Pages:
Jump to: