Loading...
> >

lost threads

ManStanManStan Posts: 0
edited December 1969 in The Commons

I guess it's nice that email notifications are being sent when you have responses to a thread, the problem is finding the thread again.

I gave up on DAZ a while back for various reasons. I came back to see if any of my issues have been solved; no. Now there is this new forum, which works as well as any new DAZ app release; which is not very well. I can't find threads again after I post them. They just get shoved further and further back till they evaporate. Seems after about 3 days the thread is gone, never to be found again.

Comments

  • SkirikiSkiriki Posts: 4,975
    edited December 1969

    E-mail notification contains a link you can click to take you back to the thread. Nowdays it even takes you to the last post you saw.

  • Norse GraphicsNorse Graphics Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    The black hole of threads...

    Even at the speed of light, no posts will escape.

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604
    edited June 2012

    They get caught up in the wormholes between galaxies, or maybe even go time travelling, although it has yet to be proved that wormholes will aid time travel.

    Post edited by Chohole on
  • SzarkSzark Posts: 10,634
    edited December 1969

    I just go to my Public Profile (Top right ) and click on View all posts by this member to see the threads I post in.

  • T JaimanT Jaiman Posts: 560
    edited June 2012

    Click, click, drat, out of ammo. Sorry, I didn't think of a way to continue the black hole line. Just let it skip over me.

    I'm usually most interested in threads that go off page 1, to likely die... So this isn't much of a change for me.

    It gives new threads a chance to be noticed, during high-traffic times, at least. :-S

    What I'd like to see is a high-speed bandwidth option to have, say, 100~200 threads per page, on the index.
    Then a person would only have to page down, instead of clicking the next page, and waiting that annoying moment.

    And you could browser search, more easily, if you don't want to dig though emails. (Especially now, when the titles don't show).

    For some reason, Firefox fails to find things, when I have to click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3...
    And if I cntl-F...

    100~200 plus latest-posts order would be ideal. 1-or-200 would be plenty of chance for a thread to get noticed.


    Edit: This sort-order requires lots of stickies, too. We're already down to 12 non-sticky non-announcements on page 1...

    Say, if stickies don't go past page 1, what will happen if there are 13 more stickies :question:

    Post edited by T Jaiman on
  • zigraphixzigraphix Posts: 2,787
    edited December 1969

    Szark said:
    I just go to my Public Profile (Top right ) and click on View all posts by this member to see the threads I post in.

    Aha! Thanks to that hint, I was able to re-create the bookmark I used to use to check threads I've posted in. Right-click on the "View all posts by this member" link and save link as bookmark (in Firefox). Works a treat! :D

  • SzarkSzark Posts: 10,634
    edited December 1969

    zigraphix said:
    Szark said:
    I just go to my Public Profile (Top right ) and click on View all posts by this member to see the threads I post in.

    Aha! Thanks to that hint, I was able to re-create the bookmark I used to use to check threads I've posted in. Right-click on the "View all posts by this member" link and save link as bookmark (in Firefox). Works a treat! :DMy pleasure. :)

  • Norse GraphicsNorse Graphics Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    T Jaiman said:
    Click, click, drat, out of ammo. Sorry, I didn't think of a way to continue the black hole line. Just let it skip over me.

    I'm usually most interested in threads that go off page 1, to likely die... So this isn't much of a change for me.

    It gives new threads a chance to be noticed, during high-traffic times, at least. :-S

    What I'd like to see is a high-speed bandwidth option to have, say, 100~200 threads per page, on the index.
    Then a person would only have to page down, instead of clicking the next page, and waiting that annoying moment.

    And you could browser search, more easily, if you don't want to dig though emails. (Especially now, when the titles don't show).

    For some reason, Firefox fails to find things, when I have to click Next, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3, click Next, F3...
    And if I cntl-F...

    100~200 plus latest-posts order would be ideal. 1-or-200 would be plenty of chance for a thread to get noticed.


    Edit: This sort-order requires lots of stickies, too. We're already down to 12 non-sticky non-announcements on page 1...

    Say, if stickies don't go past page 1, what will happen if there are 13 more stickies :question:


    Yeah!! I'm with you 100% there! 200 posts pr. page would be optimal.
  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604
    edited June 2012

    T Jaiman said:


    This sort-order requires lots of stickies, too. We're already down to 12 non-sticky non-announcements on page 1...

    Say, if stickies don't go past page 1, what will happen if there are 13 more stickies :question:


    Is that a challenge, for us to try it and see what would happen. :coolgrin:
    Post edited by Chohole on
  • SockrateaseSockratease Posts: 813
    edited December 1969

    chohole said:
    T Jaiman said:


    This sort-order requires lots of stickies, too. We're already down to 12 non-sticky non-announcements on page 1...

    Say, if stickies don't go past page 1, what will happen if there are 13 more stickies :question:


    Is that a challenge, for us to try it and see what would happen. :coolgrin:

    Actually, nothing would happen.

    EVERY thread is a sticky now! They all stay in the order they were posted, so they are "stucky" at best...

  • T JaimanT Jaiman Posts: 560
    edited June 2012

    chohole said:
    T Jaiman said:

    Say, if stickies don't go past page 1, what will happen if there are 13 more stickies :question:


    Is that a challenge, for us to try it and see what would happen. :coolgrin:

    Uhhh.... well, I am curious, but no, I'm not making a challenge.

    ...If you crash the forums, I don't want you pointing at me. 8-/

    "But we had to! It was a challenge!"
    Post edited by T Jaiman on
  • T JaimanT Jaiman Posts: 560
    edited December 1969

    Sockratease said:
    chohole said:
    T Jaiman said:


    This sort-order requires lots of stickies, too. We're already down to 12 non-sticky non-announcements on page 1...

    Say, if stickies don't go past page 1, what will happen if there are 13 more stickies :question:


    Is that a challenge, for us to try it and see what would happen. :coolgrin:

    Actually, nothing would happen.

    EVERY thread is a sticky now! They all stay in the order they were posted, so they are "stucky" at best...

    Heheheheh... good point.

    Except that stuckies are stuck in the opposite direction... or are stickys stuck in both directions?

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604
    edited June 2012

    Did a bit of checking. Forums that have only one sticky have 25 threads showing on the front page.

    Forums like this one, with lots of stickies, like this one, still have 25 threads dispalaying on the front page.

    So I thnk it would need at least one or two more stickies before we see if this forum behaves in the same way as the old one, and just lets the front page get longer and longer, as more stickies are added.

    HMMM thinks. Oh dogs, where is that devil face smilie when you want it. :coolgrin:

    Post edited by Chohole on
  • T JaimanT Jaiman Posts: 560
    edited June 2012

    chohole said:
    So I thnk it would need at least one or two more stickies before we see if this forum behaves in the same way as the old one, and just lets the front page get longer and longer, as more stickies are added.

    Haha! That's a solution I hadn't thought of.

    How many stickies were your record?
    ...was your record?

    Did it keep a certain minimum of non-stickies, just so we couldn't just jump to page 2? :coolsmirk:


    HMMM thinks. Oh dogs, where is that devil face smilie when you want it. :coolgrin:


    I think that coolgrin is pretty wicked-looking, at least.
    Post edited by T Jaiman on
  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604
    edited December 1969

    Not sure what the record was for the most stickies, but at one time I do remember the Froum Team tried to add to the chaos by stickying a thread about too many stickies, and then unstickying it and then stickying a 2nd one. They had a clear out of stickies after that, but I can't remember how many there were.

  • T JaimanT Jaiman Posts: 560
    edited June 2012

    chohole said:
    I do remember the Froum Team tried to add to the chaos by stickying a thread about too many stickies, and then unstickying it and then stickying a 2nd one. They had a clear out of stickies after that, but I can't remember how many there were.


    :lol: That's hilarious! I wish I'd seen that.
    Post edited by T Jaiman on
  • Norse GraphicsNorse Graphics Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    [Lame joke coming up]-----------> Clearly somebody has sticky fingers...

  • frank0314frank0314 Posts: 14,048
    edited December 1969

    NO! No more stickies. I hate them things.

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604
    edited December 1969

    Norse Graphics said:
    [Lame joke coming up]-----------> Clearly somebody has sticky fingers...
    sticky-fingers-sale.png
    290 x 290 - 105K
Sign In or Register to comment.