What has happened to the forum????

[Armchair Cyclist]

Re:

can we get rid of the "Cyclingnews Forum • View topic -" from the title of each page so when in tabs each one starts with the actual post topic.

I see that this has been worked on a bit today. Instead of tab text being "Cyclingnews Forum View topic - threadname", it now reads "View topic - threadname". 13 characters and spaces before the text that is helpful to have visible is I suppose an improvement on 31 characters and spaces, but in practice, not much. Instead of having several tabs displaying "Cyclingnews ..." at the top of my screen, I now have several tabs displaying "View topic -...".

The principle that the brand needs to be named up there is clearly not the case, and the logo is in the tab anyway, so would it be possible to now drop the remaining pre-amble and simply have the thread name?

Thanks.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Re: Re:

can we get rid of the "Cyclingnews Forum • View topic -" from the title of each page so when in tabs each one starts with the actual post topic.

I see that this has been worked on a bit today. Instead of tab text being "Cyclingnews Forum View topic - threadname", it now reads "View topic - threadname". 13 characters and spaces before the text that is helpful to have visible is I suppose an improvement on 31 characters and spaces, but in practice, not much. Instead of having several tabs displaying "Cyclingnews ..." at the top of my screen, I now have several tabs displaying "View topic -...".

The principle that the brand needs to be named up there is clearly not the case, and the logo is in the tab anyway, so would it be possible to now drop the remaining pre-amble and simply have the thread name?

Thanks.

+1 to the bolded bit. This is an improvement, just please tweak it a bit more.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Is it possible for the forum to have a "like" button for posts? That's one thing we often talked about wishing the old forum had.

 

[Pete]

Posts now have "Link" next to "Reply with quote". This will popup a small box allowing you to copy out a direct link to that post.

When you use the "Reply with quote" link, the username of the person being quoted will now be a link to the quoted post. This cannot be retroactive, unfortunately.

In both instances, the link to a post will be a link to the relevant thread page with an anchor link to scroll directly to the specified post. This is because phpBB does not create individual pages for each reply, so scrolling to an anchor link for the posts is what we're able to achieve.

Hopefully this will be helpful for those of you who have asked about quoting and linking to posts. We're still looking at redirects for links to posts on the old forum structure, but it's taking a little longer than anticipated.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Re:

Posts now have "Link" next to "Reply with quote". This will popup a small box allowing you to copy out a direct link to that post.

When you use the "Reply with quote" link, the username of the person being quoted will now be a link to the quoted post. This cannot be retroactive, unfortunately.

In both instances, the link to a post will be a link to the relevant thread page with an anchor link to scroll directly to the specified post. This is because phpBB does not create individual pages for each reply, so scrolling to an anchor link for the posts is what we're able to achieve.

Hopefully this will be helpful for those of you who have asked about quoting and linking to posts. We're still looking at redirects for links to posts on the old forum structure, but it's taking a little longer than anticipated.

Like this! Thanks.

 

[MacRoadie]

I am back!!!!

 

[Netserk]

Re:

Posts now have "Link" next to "Reply with quote". This will popup a small box allowing you to copy out a direct link to that post.

When you use the "Reply with quote" link, the username of the person being quoted will now be a link to the quoted post. This cannot be retroactive, unfortunately.

In both instances, the link to a post will be a link to the relevant thread page with an anchor link to scroll directly to the specified post. This is because phpBB does not create individual pages for each reply, so scrolling to an anchor link for the posts is what we're able to achieve.

Hopefully this will be helpful for those of you who have asked about quoting and linking to posts. We're still looking at redirects for links to posts on the old forum structure, but it's taking a little longer than anticipated.

This is very important, so thank you very much. As a minor thing, would it be possible to give each post in a thread a number like before?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

Posts now have "Link" next to "Reply with quote". This will popup a small box allowing you to copy out a direct link to that post.

When you use the "Reply with quote" link, the username of the person being quoted will now be a link to the quoted post. This cannot be retroactive, unfortunately.

In both instances, the link to a post will be a link to the relevant thread page with an anchor link to scroll directly to the specified post. This is because phpBB does not create individual pages for each reply, so scrolling to an anchor link for the posts is what we're able to achieve.

Hopefully this will be helpful for those of you who have asked about quoting and linking to posts. We're still looking at redirects for links to posts on the old forum structure, but it's taking a little longer than anticipated.

Very cool thanks

 

[lemon cheese cake]

Re:

Posts now have "Link" next to "Reply with quote". This will popup a small box allowing you to copy out a direct link to that post.

When you use the "Reply with quote" link, the username of the person being quoted will now be a link to the quoted post. This cannot be retroactive, unfortunately.

In both instances, the link to a post will be a link to the relevant thread page with an anchor link to scroll directly to the specified post. This is because phpBB does not create individual pages for each reply, so scrolling to an anchor link for the posts is what we're able to achieve.

Hopefully this will be helpful for those of you who have asked about quoting and linking to posts. We're still looking at redirects for links to posts on the old forum structure, but it's taking a little longer than anticipated.

Will this be single post view?

 

[krebs303]

Re: Re:

this is have not before seen by me ever. is new,yes

 

[Beech Mtn]

Can we get some sort of limit on how many posts can be deep-quoted automatically. Look at this mess:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1674669#p1674669

The posts above it in that exchange obviously are also bad. It's a waste of space and requires way too much scrolling. You can't even keep track of who said what because the text of the latest quoted post is so far down below the other posts and picture, you have to scroll back up to see who said what. And these are not even long posts, other than the pic.

This will be even worse when people deep-quote lengthy posts and replies (thinking of some of Scott & Chewy's back-and-forths in the politics thread, for example)

Many posters are probably not going to take the time to trim unnecessary quotes. We are lazy that way.

It would be better for the forum to have automatic limits and let folks deliberately multi-quote if they want.

(Not to pick on D-Queued here, lots of us will probably do this - his post was just a good example. I'm half-tempted to reply a bunch of times just to see what the cutoff is, or if there even is a cutoff on quoting.)

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

this is have not before seen by me ever. is new,yes

This is happening to me also. I have no url in my post but the quotes have more than 2. You have to go back and edit out the ***, then if typing from a pad or phone thend it is a biach. Suck this deep quoting shat

 

[Jspear]

Is there any way the "view new post" button can be on every page instead of just the main home page?

 

[Netserk]

Re:

Is there any way the "view new post" button can be on every page instead of just the main home page?

That is why I immediately bookmarked it, so I don't even have to go to the top of the page. Just a mouse click away. (I did the same before the update)

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Re:

Can we get some sort of limit on how many posts can be deep-quoted automatically. Look at this mess:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1674669#p1674669

Many posters are probably not going to take the time to trim unnecessary quotes. We are lazy that way.

It would be better for the forum to have automatic limits and let folks deliberately multi-quote if they want.

Briefly, I think last Saturday, there was a limit of one embedded quote. The user was therefore expected to edit out the additional quotes manually. That was thankfully quickly retracted.

The current facility is far better than the previous situation (the 'old' forum) in which a quote was presented with no clue as to its context. If there are examples where contributors are lazy in not trimming irrelevant matter from their messages, then other contributors in the thread should call them out for it. Their laziness being used as grounds for imposing additional work on those who want to make their messages comprehensible without sending the reader on a search through previous messages.

The indentation means that quotes are easily recognised as such, so scrolling can be done at speed with confidence that no new contributions are missed.

 

[Beech Mtn]

I don't think users should be expected to manually edit out the extra quotes. Many people don't know how to do it properly anyway with the tags and all. I think the forum software ought to have some kind of upper limit on embedded quotes and handle it automatically, with no action needed on the user end.

I'd have no issue with a high limit for regular quotes (not stacked on top of each other) - like the old forum's multi-quote system. That was clear and useful. This feature is less so, IMO.

I just had to manually edit out a quote because it said there were too many URLs in my post (because there were URLs in the quoted post, and a new URL in the post I made). Again, asking the users to edit stuff with tags that some don't understand is just going to cause grief.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Re:

I don't think users should be expected to manually edit out the extra quotes.

Lazy disregard to other users is not something that should be considered normal, or a reason to render quotes incomprehensible. Do you really think that the users who are too lazy to edit quotes will take the time and trouble to seek out the appropriate quotes to provide context for their messages?

I'm afraid that your solution provides additional work for the conscientious, and leaves the contributions of the lazy bereft of context.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Admins,
I'm having to do an awful lot of editing my post replies. Too many URLs, too many smilies, etc. And it's in posts where I have written no new URL and put in only 1 smiley. The forum software needs to stop counting URLs and smilies in quoted posts as part of our overall limit. That is, if we are going to continue to have so many quotes automatically tagged into our replies.

And I actually know how to edit tags. Many of our users do not, and won't be able to post successfully. Has nothing to do with them being lazy, but with the forum needing to be a bit more user-friendly when we post.

 

[lemon cheese cake]

Why have a limit on URLs?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

Posts now have "Link" next to "Reply with quote". This will popup a small box allowing you to copy out a direct link to that post.

When you use the "Reply with quote" link, the username of the person being quoted will now be a link to the quoted post. This cannot be retroactive, unfortunately.

In both instances, the link to a post will be a link to the relevant thread page with an anchor link to scroll directly to the specified post. This is because phpBB does not create individual pages for each reply, so scrolling to an anchor link for the posts is what we're able to achieve.

Hopefully this will be helpful for those of you who have asked about quoting and linking to posts. We're still looking at redirects for links to posts on the old forum structure, but it's taking a little longer than anticipated.

Well done - and thanks. Makes for much better UX.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Post.URLMaxCount = -1 // infinite

If User.PostCount <= 10 then {
Post.Visible = False
Account.Approved = False
}
else {
Account.Approved = True
Post.Visible = True

// etc
}


You're punishing the real, actual human (easily verifiable via user metadata) members with global restrictions to catch the spammers. Very disappoint.

 

[darwin553]

A shame that they didn't use the Xenforo software for the new forums. I would have thought that with how long the last forums were in operation for that they would have given us something better.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Why have a limit on URLs?

Emphasizing question.

The limitation is problematic when opening a race thread and surely in other cases too.

 

[fauniera]

What is this complete nonsense with "the maximum number of URLs allowed is 2"??? Are we in kindergarden? That makes some threads totally unusable again. Can we get rid of this crap as soon as possible, please?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You know they are doing it to control the spammers yeah? See my post above.