Mahz's Dev Journal

[Ellri]

We'd also suggest to make sure that the search function can be easily added to in the future to take tags into account. At least, from what we understood, you're not planning to include tag search yet. It would therefore stand to reason that it would benefit all if the search system did not need to be completely rewritten later when you do include tag search in it.

Also, one thing we do wonder a bit on... Do you think that it is possible to auto-apply certain tags to older topics? Some sort of script to browse topic titles and add a few general tags as necessary? Or would such a feature be more effort than it is worth? A good year of backlogged topics without more than the Casual/advanced/free tags would restrict somewhat on topic results.

[AlteredTundra]

Hey @Mahz, would it at all be possible to have to where new replies of topics are bolded and after said topics have been viewed they go back to normal?

[Syben]

We'd also suggest to make sure that the search function can be easily added to in the future to take tags into account. At least, from what we understood, you're not planning to include tag search yet. It would therefore stand to reason that it would benefit all if the search system did not need to be completely rewritten later when you do include tag search in it.

Also, one thing we do wonder a bit on... Do you think that it is possible to auto-apply certain tags to older topics? Some sort of script to browse topic titles and add a few general tags as necessary? Or would such a feature be more effort than it is worth? A good year of backlogged topics without more than the Casual/advanced/free tags would restrict somewhat on topic results.

@Ellri

I know absolutely nothing about coding, but could it be possible to apply something like an [old] tag based off the most recent activity of the topic?

[Ellri]

How do you mean,@Aeonumbra? Auto-apply it to topics without activity for n days? Or something else?

what we referred to in our second paragraph was applying tags to older threads so they can be hit on searches in the future. Though in hindsight its not that necessary, considering how it might be better for the system to just come up with newer RPs. The ones still active can apply the tags they want, and the dead ones don't really need tags.

But perhaps the tag search system, when it comes, should have something to ensure that RPs without any activity (IC or OoC) for say sixty days, don't pop up in regular searches? But perhaps with the option to "include dead topics" as a checkbox on the search page?

[Syben]

How do you mean,@Aeonumbra? Auto-apply it to topics without activity for n days? Or something else?

what we referred to in our second paragraph was applying tags to older threads so they can be hit on searches in the future. Though in hindsight its not that necessary, considering how it might be better for the system to just come up with newer RPs. The ones still active can apply the tags they want, and the dead ones don't really need tags.

But perhaps the tag search system, when it comes, should have something to ensure that RPs without any activity (IC or OoC) for say sixty days, don't pop up in regular searches? But perhaps with the option to "include dead topics" as a checkbox on the search page?

@Ellri

That's kind of what I was speculating. Typically, you search for something seen before, or relevant, or something lost, something older. To separate the two, I feel, would be a great benefit. I'd hate to search for something I remember glancing at, and come up with a load of dead topics.

So basically, yes, auto-applying a tag ([Old][Inactive][Dead] , etc.) to topics with the most recent activity set "x" amount of days ago. I wasn't sure if there was an actual calculation for "x days ago" versus, say, using a time stamp. Again, I have no real knowledge of coding. I'm just here hoping one of you smarter people gets a good idea heh. But basically, we are on the same page, ideally. Though, should this search function include the 'characters' tabs?

[Ellri]

A natural element for this search would be filtering for various tabs and for thread types, like interest checks or non-RP, non-IntCk threads. After all, people could be searching for discussions or spam threads for all we know. Not everyone will be searching for RPs.

[Syben]

A natural element for this search would be filtering for various tabs and for thread types, like interest checks or non-RP, non-IntCk threads. After all, people could be searching for discussions or spam threads for all we know. Not everyone will be searching for RPs.

@Ellri

True, but I assumed that would be the case. I was just kind of curious if there would be 'characters tab' integration.

[TheFake]

Loving the changes, especially the mobile friendly and new functionality.

• Is it necessary to show the disabled page navigation? I know that not having them would throw off the alignment so perhaps something as simple as below would work. The element won't be rendered but will still take up space to preserve the alignment.
  
  li.disabled{
visibility: hidden;
}
• We can hide forum sections, is it possible to also have users able to hide the widgets on the right as well?
• in post links on headers for those long, wiki article like posts. Would make things easier for those detail obsessed GMs.
  [url=#setting]setting[/url]
[h1=Setting]somethingsomething[/h1]
• Is there any way to have some sort of infinite pagination for the forum and topic views as seen on things like a facebook or twitter feed?

[Captain Jordan]

Is there any way to have some sort of infinite pagination for the forum and topic views as seen on things like a facebook or twitter feed?

@TheFake

Eh, this gets really annoying IMHO. It's not appropriate for forums where discussions move in a linear format, especially so you always know you can revert back to page 2 to see a particular post, and not have to scroll up for ages to do so.

I'd be in support of having varying amounts of posts per topic page, however. Some folks prefer fewer page loads, and loading 20, 30, 50 posts at a time could alleviate some of this hurt. But I don't think Mahz has the pagination set up to accommodate this.

[Shienvien]

I'd be in support of having varying amounts of posts per topic page, however. Some folks prefer fewer page loads, and loading 20, 30, 50 posts at a time could alleviate some of this hurt. But I don't think Mahz has the pagination set up to accommodate this.

@Captain Jordan

I'd personally like to have more posts per page, at least on PC. Though not on cell due to increased loading times and swipe-scrolling. So I'd prefer it device-specific (more cookies?) if it were to be implemented. It shouldn't be too hard to implement (in my implementations, changing posts-per-page is essentially tied to a single number; not sure how Mahz did it since I've still not gotten to going over the site code ... too many own things).

Edit: I'd still prefer if quotes and quotementions were separate things (without having to manually remove the '@' each and every time if you want a regular quote - I tend to forget to do it)?

[LegendBegins]

<Snipped quote by Captain Jordan>
I'd personally like to have more posts per page, at least on PC. Though not on cell due to increased loading times and swipe-scrolling. So I'd prefer it device-specific (more cookies?) if it were to be implemented. It shouldn't be too hard to implement (in my implementations, changing posts-per-page is essentially tied to a single number; not sure how Mahz did it since I've still not gotten to going over the site code ... too many own things).

Edit: I'd still prefer if quotes and quotementions were separate things (without having to manually remove the '@' each and every time if you want a regular quote - I tend to forget to do it)?

@Shienvien

I would say that adding another button to the window would overcrowd it for functions that perform essentially the same action.

[Shienvien]

That is also a thinf, yes... I do admit that far more often than not, I personally want a regular quote, and not a quotemention, though. (In combination with not notification-flooding people, which I by principle try not to do.)

[Captain Jordan]

That is also a thinf, yes... I do admit that far more often than not, I personally want a regular quote, and not a quotemention, though. (In combination with not notification-flooding people, which I by principle try not to do.)

@Shienvien

I'd much rather know when someone's quoting me. But I think this is probably better resolved by allowing users to determine what will notify them, and be able to uncheck quotes.

[Shienvien]

I'd much rather know when someone's quoting me. But I think this is probably better resolved by allowing users to determine what will notify them, and be able to uncheck quotes.

@Captain Jordan

But here's the dilemma: sometimes I want to send a notification or be notified. Just ... not with (or for) all basic quotes. Only for those which actually require the person to see the post and potentially answer to it (and I sometimes also don't want to ping people in threads I know they are already watching closely either way). - Which is essentially where the distinction between quotes and quotementions comes in.
Does the current system even distinguish between mentions and quotementions? I noticed the "quotes sent" number counts regular quotes, but sadly I forgot to look whether a quotemention counts as both or just quote ... let's see with this post.

I also think that letting people disable mentions that people purposefully send interferes with the purpose of being able to ping them in the first place. Random things such as rating notifications being toggleable - I support that. Deliberate pings? Not so much (especially if others won't even know whether the ping "worked" or not - granted, there are people who don't check notifications either way, but on the other hand, being flooded with them is likely to increase the number of people who simply give up on keeping up with them).
As I noted before, I see notifications as something to be used rather sparingly, and only when the person's presence is needed (so that they'd be useful rather than annoying).

I wonder whether is possible to get several pings to the same person out of a single post with this system. Above there is a quote already, so... @Captain Jordan @Captain Jordan

[NuttsnBolts]

Is there any way to have some sort of infinite pagination for the forum and topic views as seen on things like a facebook or twitter feed?

@TheFake

The infinite scroll thing may not work on this site due to the nature of its structure. Most of those sites (Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, etc) tend to be blog like in structure or designed for quick notifications. If you're making an RP site into an infinite scroll site you'll have to answer a few questions.
- Will new post be up the top or bottom of the feed?
- How will that impact the readability of Roleplays if someone is always seeing the latest thread (almost like reading a book backwards) or has to scroll to the end of an immense list just to read a post?
- I want to look up the a particular post in a thread with 1400 posts (like this one). Wouldn't it be easier to jump back through the pages compares to playing DJ on the mouse wheel?

I just believe that the negatives would outweigh the positives when it comes down to the user experience.

[Captain Jordan]

I wonder whether is possible to get several pings to the same person out of a single post with this system. Above there is a quote already, so... @Captain Jordan @Captain Jordan

@Shienvien

Yes, there is. Not sure if bug or just cool feature. However, it only pings twice, not three times.

[NuttsnBolts]

<Snipped quote by Shienvien>

Yes, there is. Not sure if bug or just cool feature. However, it only pings twice, not three times.

@Captain Jordan

Twice for the quote and mention probably.

<Snipped quote by Shienvien>

Yes, there is. Not sure if bug or just cool feature. However, it only pings twice, not three times.

@Captain Jordan

@Captain Jordan@Captain Jordan

How many pings?

[Captain Jordan]

<Snipped quote by Captain Jordan>

But here's the dilemma: sometimes I want to send a notification or be notified. Just ... not with (or for) all basic quotes. Only for those which actually require the person to see the post and potentially answer to it (and I sometimes also don't want to ping people in threads I know they are already watching closely either way). - Which is essentially where the distinction between quotes and quotementions comes in.
Does the current system even distinguish between mentions and quotementions? I noticed the "quotes sent" number counts regular quotes, but sadly I forgot to look whether a quotemention counts as both or just quote ... let's see with this post.

I also think that letting people disable mentions that people purposefully send interferes with the purpose of being able to ping them in the first place. Random things such as rating notifications being toggleable - I support that. Deliberate pings? Not so much (especially if others won't even know whether the ping "worked" or not - granted, there are people who don't check notifications either way, but on the other hand, being flooded with them is likely to increase the number of people who simply give up on keeping up with them).
As I noted before, I see notifications as something to be used rather sparingly, and only when the person's presence is needed (so that they'd be useful rather than annoying).

I wonder whether is possible to get several pings to the same person out of a single post with this system. Above there is a quote already, so... @Captain Jordan @Captain Jordan

@Shienvien

Wouldn't the ability to disable quotes from notifying, but allowing @mentions, satisfy your desire? Honestly, I think fixing the unmentionable quotes (tehe) from notifying is going to be the solution, and you'll just need to remove the @. It takes a bit of forethought, but so does clicking the right button.

The other side of it is to strip out the @ mention from quotes by default, and add it back in when you think it's necessary. But I think more people would miss that subtlety and forget to use the feature.

[Captain Jordan]

<Snipped quote by Captain Jordan>

Twice for the quote and mention probably.

<Snipped quote by Captain Jordan>@Captain Jordan@Captain Jordan

How many pings?

@NuttsnBolts

[Shienvien]

Honestly, I think fixing the unmentionable quotes (tehe) from notifying is going to be the solution, and you'll just need to remove the @. It takes a bit of forethought, but so does clicking the right button.

Captain Jordan

I think Mahz said (and BBCode cheatsheet states) that quotes already only notify if there is an '@' in front of the username (as I noted somewhere previously, I've been removing the '@'s in most places ... if I remember to do so, which I don't half of the time). Just to check, though, here is a regular quote which shouldn't have notified you.
- I'd like for both quotes and quotementions to exist (since both already exist and it'd spare people from quoting and also mention-pinging, in certain instances), but I'd rather it either defaulted to non-mention quotes or had two separate buttons for them. You're right that people who don't read the BBCode sheet would miss the ability to quotemention when it just defaulted to regular quotes, though.

Unrelated: Could the white text on hiders be turned black and shadowless on hiders, too? Right now they're the same white-ish text on light grey tabs used to be. (Same deal with several buttons on the site.)