Ditto

Jump to navigation Jump to search

So far I have been finding it bit clunky, but can we use liquid threads on the forums to make them more forum like? - π 23:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

23:37, 14 November 2010

Is this the hideous new interface planned for the forums?

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX23:53, 14 November 2010

No, this is a hideous new interface available with MediaWiki 1.16. I was wondering whether we should use it on the forums.

- π23:55, 14 November 2010
 

Is horrid. But they always say that about new things. (It's still horrid)

SusanG Toast23:56, 14 November 2010

I do like that you can reply to people at levels though.

- π23:57, 14 November 2010

I hate it. This is a Wiki; whatever happened to signing your posts with four tildes and actually having to hit "reload" to see replies?

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX23:59, 14 November 2010

You have to reload to see replies now. At least now you can reload just the thread and not the whole page

- π00:02, 15 November 2010
 

Sorry I misread your reply.

- π00:07, 15 November 2010
 

You can reply at any level in wiki-lang too, just make the indent appropriate. I do it all the time. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:46, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

ħumanUser talk:Human17:46, 21 November 2010

Hmm, so I hit "reply" to a comment four above this. That comment did not end up where I wanted it to.

I am assuming that one advantage to this ghastly system is that it avoids edit conflicts? I can't think of any others.

ħumanUser talk:Human17:48, 21 November 2010

ListenerX already replied to that same comment, and then there were two replies to that. Your comment comes after Listener's, but the two replies to his comment are inserted in there... it makes sense if you think about it.

-- Nx / talk17:53, 21 November 2010

Barely, yes. I see what it did. But that's not where I wanted my reply to post. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:58, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

ħumanUser talk:Human17:58, 21 November 2010
 
 

The point is that it's much easier with lqt.

-- Nx / talk17:48, 21 November 2010
 
 

It is ugly, but it's convenient. You can use it on your talk page if you want.

-- Nx / talk23:58, 14 November 2010

The convenience I like. Can we fix the ugly a bit, throw some colours on it?

- π00:00, 15 November 2010

I agree with the number. But I'm getting a 4chan vibe from this. so please don't change the saloon bar.

TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist00:03, 15 November 2010

There is a principle in design: "KISS," short for "Keep It Simple, Stupid." Deviate from this principle and things start to become Byzantine in complexity. But if we must have this, could the background color of the boxes be changed to be the same as the page background?

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX00:16, 15 November 2010

Using MediaWiki as a forum is not simple. You have to manually do indentation, manually sign your comments, you have to deal with unsigned comments, you have to deal with edit conflicts, and the database is littered with redundant data because with every comment the entire page is saved.

-- Nx / talk00:17, 15 November 2010

(ECx200000000) Hey. You would have edit conflicted me just then, so I am still going to complain about it.

- π00:19, 15 November 2010

Also, why do the latest replies get cut off when you reload the page, so that you have to click the link "Show X replies" every time?

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX00:24, 15 November 2010

Because they didn't want people going off on tangents. You're supposed to reply to the first post, not the previous one.

-- Nx / talk00:26, 15 November 2010

How counter-intuitive is that? Smiley freakout.gif This is completely ruining the fun of conversation here. It is as bad as the user interface of Mac OS Classic.

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX00:34, 15 November 2010

You have to keep in mind that this was designed for Wikipedia.

-- Nx / talk00:36, 15 November 2010

That place is SERIOUS BUSINESS, we want fun here.

- π00:37, 15 November 2010
 
 

Going off on tangents is what RW is for though!

ħumanUser talk:Human17:50, 21 November 2010
 

I just replied to Nx' comment that says "Because they didn't want people going off on tangents." and I can't even find my reply.

ħumanUser talk:Human17:51, 21 November 2010

It's here.

-- Nx / talk17:52, 21 November 2010
 
 

That can be changed - I think. Comment tower?

- π00:26, 15 November 2010
 

You can change it in preferences, just set a high enough value.

-- Nx / talk00:45, 15 November 2010
 
 
 

This is fairly simple. You see a comment you wish to reply too. You click reply and you type in the box.

- π00:18, 15 November 2010

On the other hand, with MediaWiki you could easily cut entire conversations to different pages, interleave your replies when necessary, etc. Also, you were forced to read any new posts to a conversation before you posted your own because of the edit conflicts.

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX00:22, 15 November 2010
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

So do we like this idea or not?

- π12:05, 16 November 2010

I think the consensus is: yes, if you change the colors.

TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist12:14, 16 November 2010

What kind of consensus? There has been serious dissent (and I would like to be counted among the dissenters), and this is actually a very major change to the site's UI. It'll need a lot more than a couple of people's indifference to allow it through.

Time evil Hoover!18:06, 21 November 2010
 

meh.

Occasionaluse (talk)13:50, 16 November 2010
 

Smiley freakout.gif NO! NO! NO! (But if they are to be used, the background color should be changed to be the same as the background color of the page.)

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX23:43, 16 November 2010
 

It is awful. I don't care what it looks like, I can't even follow this conversation, and my comments are ending up in places I don't expect them to.

The nice thing about using the wiki-syntax for our forums is it is the same as our talk pages and articles - ie, a new user only has to learn one way to have a conversation here.

ħumanUser talk:Human17:52, 21 November 2010

The problem is that they have to learn how to have a conversation. Let's face it, MediaWiki is not exactly ideal for conversations.

-- Nx / talk17:55, 21 November 2010

Neither is this. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

ħumanUser talk:Human18:00, 21 November 2010

Let's see, all you have to do is click reply, type something and click save. No having to figure out where to insert your comment, how many colons it needs, having to remember to sign your posts, and no edit conflicts.

-- Nx / talk18:02, 21 November 2010

I dispute the first point, as one has to scroll up and down the page trying to find out which reply button to click. This is harder than typing one more colon than on the last post, or typing four tildes at the end of the post, or even dealing with an edit conflict.

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX18:13, 21 November 2010

There needs to be a big post new comment button at the bottom of a thread, but otherwise, don't tell me it's harder to find the appropriate reply button than to figure out where to put your comment on a wiki talk page, assuming you're not replying at the bottom.

-- Nx / talk18:38, 21 November 2010

It is; for the latter, you just have to click "edit" and then grep the text for the post you want to put yours after. Here, because of the new rule about how "you're supposed to reply to the first post, not the previous one" (a remark of yours which, thanks to this new interface, I cannot diff-link to; another reason we should not adopt this, lest we give the Conservapedians ideas), you have to scroll up and down until you find the correct "first post."

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX18:45, 21 November 2010

Also, why do I have to hunt up and down the page and click an "Update" link before I am able to see my own posts?

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX18:46, 21 November 2010

Probably a bug.

-- Nx / talk18:50, 21 November 2010

So this is, by your own admission, buggy? That would rule it out for site-wide use immediately.

Time evil Hoover!20:55, 21 November 2010

Yes, since it's alpha quality software. I have never denied that. I may have been too optimistic about the timeframe of LQT's maturation before, but right now the only reason it's installed at all is that I've managed to fix rollback on comments. Also, changing every talk page to lqt would be a huge job, we'd have to archive and clean up every talk page.

Right now, it's just here for testing, and if you like it you can enable it on your talk page.

-- Nx / talk21:03, 21 November 2010

Right, so that rules the issue in question moot; alpha quality software shouldn't be used as widely as was proposed in any case.

Time evil Hoover!21:46, 21 November 2010

Tell that to translatewiki. Anyway, I wasn't the one who started this page, so you're barking up the wrong tree

-- Nx / talk21:48, 21 November 2010
 
 
 
 
 

That's why I said it needs a post new comment button at the bottom.

As for difflinks - each comment is actually a separate page. In the "More" dropdown menu you'll find a "link to" button, which will take you to the comment page: Thread:Forum:Use liquid threads in the forum?/Ditto/reply_(18)

-- Nx / talk18:50, 21 November 2010

What would be nice is a quote feature like most phpBB have.

- π03:22, 22 November 2010
 
 

I've added a reply button to the bottom of threads, hope that makes it more obvious where you need to click. Should I also add a reply button to the right side of the header, where the [edit] link is on normal headers?

-- Nx / talk12:21, 2 December 2010

Now add a like button!!!!

Scarlet A.pnggnostic15:09, 2 December 2010
 

But yes, add a button there too. Although you won't see that if you're going via the "new messages" tab, as I am mostly. I've still yet to get used to reading this on an actual thread or page yet!

Scarlet A.pnggnostic15:10, 2 December 2010
 
 
 
 

But this has the added benefit of being incredibly fugly, in addition to being terrible at conversations.

Reminds me a bit of LiveJournal, honestly.

Kels (talk)18:04, 21 November 2010

I don't know, have any of you guys actually used VB or phpBB at all? It's just the same thing but bunged onto MediaWiki. If we used it in the forum space, it would be exactly the same and no one complains about usability issues with proper forum software.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic20:58, 21 November 2010

Well, I actually do have issues with "proper forum software", since it is also full of worthless clutter which just makes conversations less easy to follow.

Time evil Hoover!21:14, 21 November 2010

Then suggest a better way of doing it. As it stands, the talk page way of indenting, missing replies, fucking up addressing the right people and generating edit conflicts is a right pain in the ass.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic21:34, 21 November 2010

Get rid of these boxes. Remove the pointless buttons. Make it an interface to the underlying format rather than this insane mix of parser tags. Remove the obnoxious "new messages" alert.

Time evil Hoover!16:04, 22 November 2010
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I don't like this. It's not intuitive, even for people used to forums. Things posted as a "reply" don't appear next to comment their replying to, & stacks of comments are hidden, only appearing when you click on "show 14 replies". It's not clear why some comments are tucked away like this & others aren't, or what you can do to make sure your comment remains on the page. This makes it particularly badly suited to what we're trying to do here: gauge the opinions of a wide selection of users, since so many people's comments are going to fall into one of these pockets of invisibility.

It place replies a level under the one you are replying to, in chronological order, like Wordpress blogs. I have it cranked up so that I can see all the replies at once and let me tell you the load time is unbearable. This software is still alpha, which means that the developers still have not settled on the features to be included and there are no plans to use this sitewide - I just wanted to test it in terms of a forum discussion and as the messaging system on my userpage.

- π23:25, 21 November 2010

How do you get it "cranked up"?

Go to my preferences and change your settings for Threaded discussions.

- π01:59, 22 November 2010
 
 

For instance, this should appear under Pi's comment as I'm second. It would save an edit conflict. But considering this is an experimental extension rather than a full fledged install of VB or similar, it's not bad.

The comments should appear expanded up until the newest one under "new messages" which highlights new replies. The ones tucked away are side-tracked threads without new replies. If someone makes a similar reply under the normal talk page system they're equally likely to be missed. Under the usual way of doing it with talk pages, the intuitive thing is to scroll to the bottom of a section - so if someone's indent etiquette says to post a direct reply in the middle of the discussion, you'll miss it unless you were lucky enough to catch it on recent changes.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic23:37, 21 November 2010

Fuck, I just wanted to ask "WHERE DO I ASK TO GET THE "YOU HAVE NEW MESSAGES" THING REMOVED FROM MY WATCHLIST?" but I see no way to make a new section or such. Please kill this until it actually works...

ħumanUser talk:Human03:56, 22 November 2010

At the top where it says, start a new discussion above all the threads.

- π03:59, 22 November 2010
 

It's crap, face it.

ħumanUser talk:Human03:57, 22 November 2010
 

I do like the idea of folding away old comments by default, but doesn't the new message thing do something similar to that any way? It is had for me to tell because I have set the folding default high enough that I don't get folding.

- π04:22, 22 November 2010

"There are new messages for you." Where?

This format FUCKING SUCKS ADMIT IT.

Christ, where am I supposed to look in this pile of shit for the "new messages for you"? I have a fucking talk page for "new messages for me". I also have a watchlist I use. This structure needs to DIE a quick death. Because every time I get the "There are new messages for you." I will come here and say this, since I can't find those delightful "new messages" that are supposedly "for me"

KILL THIS NOW.

ħumanUser talk:Human05:25, 22 November 2010

And I think the new messages page is a great idea, I can see all the new replies to threads I'm following in one place, conveniently highlighted, instead of having to go through Recent Changes (or my watchlist) and spot the pages I'm interested in that have new messages. Going through new replies diff-by-diff is impractical because it is slow, and if I instead look at the whole thread it is hard to find the new comments, especially the ones that go off on a tangent and have been inserted in the middle of a discussion.

-- Nx / talk07:50, 22 November 2010

The only complaint I have is with the phrasing, I don't think messages is the right word. Maybe replies?

- π08:19, 22 November 2010
 

Then click "mark all as read" and it will remove them without you having to bother yourself. Have you not noticed that it highlights the new replies with a box around them? Something that isn't done with new posts anywhere else unless you happen to like trawling through diffs or are lucky enough to catch it on recent changes.

And again, I'm seeing nothing other than "it's crap" and a lot of capital letters.

Seriously, am I the only person that has figured out how to use this without any hand holding? It's not difficult.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic08:48, 22 November 2010

" Have you not noticed that it highlights the new replies with a box around them? "

That's the odd part. This conversation came up in my "New Messages" list, but there's nothing highlighted as new. I expanded all the conversations, but there's nothing there.

And the condescending "am I the only person that has figured out how to use this without any hand holding?" is noted and not appreciated.

Kels (talk)12:46, 23 November 2010

I had the same thing. It might be because I grabbed the part of this conversation that had the new message and dragged it to another thread.

- π12:58, 23 November 2010
 

When people complain they can't figure something out when I did pretty quickly, I have a right to be condescending. Either that or I have Sylar's intuitive aptitude.

But since being a dick is apparently the only way to get any recognition on RationalWiki, I decided to start properly.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic13:45, 23 November 2010

"getting attention" =! "taken seriously", just sayin'.

Kels (talk)14:19, 23 November 2010

I'll assume that's "=/=" :) I apologise for the condescension and being a prick. I should remark you're not one of the users that deserves it.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic15:29, 23 November 2010

Then I shall be officially corrected and mollified.

Kels (talk)22:19, 23 November 2010
 
 

You know, you have a serious superiority complex, and it asserts itself depressingly frequently. Pity, since you're otherwise intelligent and pleasant.

Time evil Hoover!22:35, 23 November 2010

I've noticed it getting worse too. I will try to reign it in as I'm not a fan of myself being a dick.

Scarlet A.pnggnostic08:51, 24 November 2010