Little things that bug you/me about the forum

[PX-Z]

With threads that receive many merits from many users, have an option to shrink it is good but how many meriters you chose as a threshold for shrinking?

I saw you coded it as 2 lines but 2 lines can be for 10 meriters or 15 or 20 meriters depends on lengths of usernames.
May you customize it to something like number of meriters people want to see like 10, 15, 20 or 30, and they can customize it?

This solution depends on the height only of the html div wrapper of usernames (user who sent merits), so regardless the numbers of users despite the length of the usernames it will fit there. The customization of number of users to show is possible but it could be better if a server-side script (PHP) will be added which i don't know since only theymos or can only know what parameters are used, maybe PowerGlove have the local copy of forum source code too.

[ChiBitCTy]

Mr Robot, I know you’ve got so little going on and tons of free time so here’s one for ya lol ( this is just an fyi if you ever get REALLY bored ).. so I did a pumpkin carving contest in 2022 ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5416347.msg61081449#msg61081449 ) and gearing up to do it again in 2 weeks. Theymos reached out to me and made suggestions /offered to help “re-work” the poll results to allow for certain things. He made some good points as to why we should do so ( and he did ).  Im assuming it’s not super difficult to “manipulate” a polls results but surely more work to rebuild the code for the possible parameters to be set for certain reasons. Im sure the pizza contest, the awards contest would appreciate a more robust poll too. Anyways, this is an “it’d be nice, surely plenty of more important things to be worked on”.  

Cheers

[Alone055]

Hi PowerGlove.

I have noticed this myself a few times but never gave it much attention, but today when I saw this post, it reminded me of this and I wanted to suggest this change.

So it's about the "Ignore" feature/button that we see under a user's profile in a thread. What happens is when we click that button, the user gets ignored immediately, and this can cause problems sometimes just as the user in the post I mentioned above said that he tends to ignore a lot of users by mistake when scrolling on a mobile phone. I know that it reloads the page when the button is clicked and one should notice what just happened, but maybe some people wouldn't notice.

So, I suggest that there should be a pop-up notification when someone clicks the "Ignore" button asking user's consent before actually putting the other user on ignore. So when I click on the "Ignore" button, my browser should show me a pop-up saying, "Are you sure you want to put [user] on ignore?" and then there should options such as "Yes" and "No". If someone has clicked the button knowingly, they would go ahead and click "Yes" which would put the user on ignore, and if it was clicked by mistake, clicking "No" should revert the action and get the user back to the page without reloading.

I checked this whole thread and I didn't see anyone suggesting this. So I believe it's not a repeated suggestion.  

[LoyceV]

just as the user in the post I mentioned above said that he tends to ignore a lot of users by mistake when scrolling on a mobile phone.

I don't think the forum should be changed because one new user with a few posts can't use his tiny screen without clicking on the wrong links. He could get a different device, or change the way he scrolls.

So, I suggest that there should be a pop-up notification when someone clicks the "Ignore" button asking user's consent before actually putting the other user on ignore.

To quote myself:

I don't like this either. Every extra click means more work for the same thing.

Maybe it's a Windows thing to want to have "warnings", but the Linux way is to do what the user wants, instantly. Asking for confirmation all the time only means people click it without reading, while it's much better to think about your actions before you do them.

[Alone055]

I don't think the forum should be changed because one new user with a few posts can't use his tiny screen without clicking on the wrong links. He could get a different device, or change the way he scrolls.

As much as I respect your opinion, I think there is no harm in having a small addition that could be useful for every user since it would provide more convenience and fewer chances of unintentional things happening. The guy I mentioned is a mere reference, the feature can be useful for the forum as a whole, in my opinion.

Asking for confirmation all the time only means people click it without reading, while it's much better to think about your actions before you do them.

You are not wrong about that, but perhaps mistakes and unintentional occurrences are things too, and if there is something we can do to avoid actions being performed that are triggered unintentionally, why not?

[LoyceV]

why not?

Popups are annoying, that's why

[Alone055]

why not?

Popups are annoying, that's why

But they are useful.   If used properly, of course.

The ones that you see on websites that are covered mostly by ads are annoying, no doubt.

Edit: Something just clicked in my mind. For people like you, who find popups annoying or don't want such a feature, we can add a checkbox in the popup that would say "Remember my choice" and then you can mark the checkbox and then click on "Yes" so that next time when you click on "Ignore", you are not asked for confirmation unless you clear cookies or something. I'm sure it's possible.  

[coinlary]

I know that it reloads the page when the button is clicked and one should notice what just happened, but maybe some people wouldn't notice.

I don't use the feature actually but I do experience the refresh of a particular page but I  just take it as a normal refresh especially when I'm still at the top part of the page.

I don't think the forum should be changed because one new user with a few posts can't use his tiny screen without clicking on the wrong links. He could get a different device, or change the way he scrolls.

I don't think I was the only one  that's experiencing this, it happens so fast that you might not notice and mabe it's the way I scroll but it's more like a normal scrolling to me when I'm just looking for main ideas  of a thread, for example what made me created the thread was that I ignored  ABCbits  , I saw it yesterday and I was like what's happened (I know this might have happened when I was going through his comments on my post I think) then I checked the link dropped on my last thread to check the list of ignored users and I saw 2 more , I said it earlier I don't use the feature.

The idea by Alone055 seems to be a good one

[dkbit98]

As much as I respect your opinion, I think there is no harm in having a small addition that could be useful for every user since it would provide more convenience and fewer chances of unintentional things happening. The guy I mentioned is a mere reference, the feature can be useful for the forum as a whole, in my opinion.

So you are saying that 99.999% of other members should agree with this change of moving ignore button and getting used to it because of one member reported this issue?
In all my years in bitcointalk forum I never before heard that anyone else accidently clicked ignore button multiple times.
This is not the work for PowerGlove.

[PowerGlove]

So, I suggest that there should be a pop-up notification when someone clicks the "Ignore" button asking user's consent before actually putting the other user on ignore.

That suggestion makes good sense to me. (Thanks for using this thread, BTW.)

I see Loyce isn't happy, so I'll explain why I think this suggestion tracks:

(*) My impression, after digesting many posts going back a long time, is that there really is some kind of ergonomic/usability issue with people accidentally tapping on things from the left-hand-side of their screens as they're scrolling (accidentally ignored users, and accidentally locked topics).

(*) While it's true that confirmation dialogs tend to be ignored out of habit after a while, in this case that's perfect: When you mean to actually ignore someone, then you'll expect to see the dialog and can quickly click-through without stopping to think about anything. But when you're not trying to ignore someone, and accidentally hit the link while scrolling, then that dialog will be completely unexpected, and will make you stop and think "Huh? No, I don't want to ignore so-and-so."

(*) Ignoring someone isn't as frequent of an action as (let's say) sending merit. If someone can make the case that they ignore people at a rate that would be meaningfully impacted by a confirmation dialog, then I'd be curious to hear it. (And in that case, what I'll do is add a new setting to let people disable the new dialog, but I really don't think that additional complication is worth it: having to persist a new setting turns this from a very simple change into something that theymos will have to review much more carefully.)

It's a nice thought experiment to imagine any given change as already being present, and then try to think about how a proposal to remove that thing would look/feel. There's a difference between things that were carefully designed and should be left alone, and things that people are just used to. I'm pretty certain that if the SMF mod that (I think) the user-ignore feature is based on had included a confirmation dialog from the start, then any proposal to now get rid of that would probably be met with "What are you doing? Leave it alone!"

[joker_josue]

So, I suggest that there should be a pop-up notification when someone clicks the "Ignore" button asking user's consent before actually putting the other user on ignore.

That suggestion makes good sense to me. (Thanks for using this thread, BTW.)

I see Loyce isn't happy, so I'll explain why I think this suggestion tracks:

You don't necessarily have to be a traditional pop-up. It could be a prompt question. Basically it is a message that appears in the browser, which must be confirmed. Using this type of command even avoids using javascript. As it only occurs in situations where the user himself intervenes, I don't see a big problem.

[LoyceV]

(*) Ignoring someone isn't as frequent of an action as (let's say) sending merit.

Are you sure about that? I've seen enough posts from people who can no longer view their Ignore list, because it's too long doesn't load before it times out. Most users haven't sent that many sMerits, and I can only hope people use the Ignore list when they read crap. I know there are many more posts that aren't worth reading than there are good posts, so it would make sense to use the Ignore button a lot.
If anything, it may be undervalued. We're now going from the suggestion to bring back the glowing-hot Ignore button (to make it easier to recognize and ignore shitposters), to making it harder to ignore someone.

I'm pretty certain that if the SMF mod that (I think) the user-ignore feature is based on had included a confirmation dialog from the start, then any proposal to now get rid of that would probably be met with "What are you doing? Leave it alone!"

Okay, here's one: the "delete" button has such a confirmation popup. I'd love to see that removed! I now use my middle-mouse button on the delete button (this deletes the post without popup while opening a new tab which I can click away). I think I've done that accidentally only twice. I'd be totally fine to never see any confirmation popup ever again.

As a compromise, how about a popup to Unignore someone? Something like: "You ignored this user for a reason. Think about it, think about why you're doing this to yourself again. You don't want to read these posts, don't do it. Are you sure?". Then, charge a fee to unignore the user. Make it more expensive each time you unignore someone

[Alone055]

That suggestion makes good sense to me. (Thanks for using this thread, BTW.)

You're welcome. 

(*) Ignoring someone isn't as frequent of an action as (let's say) sending merit. If someone can make the case that they ignore people at a rate that would be meaningfully impacted by a confirmation dialog, then I'd be curious to hear it. (And in that case, what I'll do is add a new setting to let people disable the new dialog, but I really don't think that additional complication is worth it: having to persist a new setting turns this from a very simple change into something that theymos will have to review much more carefully.)

What do you think of this?:

For people like you, who find popups annoying or don't want such a feature, we can add a checkbox in the popup that would say "Remember my choice" and then you can mark the checkbox and then click on "Yes" so that next time when you click on "Ignore", you are not asked for confirmation unless you clear cookies or something. I'm sure it's possible. 

Can't we take someone's choice from that checkbox and save it as a cookie so that the browser remembers it just like how the browser keeps us logged in forever after we mark the "Always stay logged in" checkbox when we are logging in to the forum? If it's possible, it will probably be easier and will require less hassle than adding a new setting for letting users disable the dialog box.

Are you sure about that? I've seen enough posts from people who can no longer view their Ignore list, because it's too long doesn't load before it times out. Most users haven't sent that many sMerits, and I can only hope people use the Ignore list when they read crap. I know there are many more posts that aren't worth reading than there are good posts, so it would make sense to use the Ignore button a lot.

Do you guys ignore every shitposter? Why? I don't think it's necessary to ignore every single shitposter in the forum because there are too many, and it's almost an unending road, you ignore 100 and there will be 200 more in the next week.

The best way is to ignore such users the way how you ignore people or things in real life, pass by them, and behave and react like they don't exist. Just don't give them attention, don't read their posts, just have a look and move in. You don't need to read the whole post to understand whether it is going to be good or not, having a general view of it or maybe reading a sentence or two would give you an idea and then you can move on.

The ignore button should be used for absolutely annoying users, those that you know are unbearable to see or watch roaming around in every thread in the forum.

[PowerGlove]

Are you sure about that?

No, I'm not sure about that (normally I'm careful to avoid speaking in absolutes, and that sentence could definitely use a "probably").

I mean, my (badly expressed) point wasn't about clicks-per-link across the entire user base, it was more about the fact that I can easily imagine people (like merit sources) getting legitimately annoyed about the merit-sending interaction getting gummed up with a confirmation dialog. But, I struggle to see the same for the ignore-user interaction. Like I said at the end of that point: I'm open to learning about users that feel that this change would make their lives more difficult in a concrete way (that is, how this change will genuinely affect their honestly-considered, realistic forum habits; not abstract arguments about not liking this change in principle).

I've seen enough posts from people who can no longer view their Ignore list, because it's too long doesn't load before it times out.

Yup, I know.

Though, if you read Foxpup's post carefully, you'll see that she's trying to add people in bulk, and is avoiding one-by-one ignoring them using the link we're talking about:

(I could find threads they've posted in and use the Ignore link on their posts, but there's too many of them; it'll take forever to ignore them all individually.)

(I mean, that doesn't speak to the other people with thousands of users on their ignore lists, but, it's interesting.)

As a compromise, how about a popup to Unignore someone? Something like: "You ignored this user for a reason. Think about it, think about why you're doing this to yourself again. You don't want to read these posts, don't do it. Are you sure?". Then, charge a fee to unignore the user. Make it more expensive each time you unignore someone

Haha, yeah. Though, the part I've bolded is actually the problem here. People getting ignored for no reason.

How about this as a (non-funny) compromise: I'll make it so that if you're holding down a certain key when you click the link, the confirmation will be skipped. (And maybe I can add that in a few other spots, too.)

[LoyceV]

Do you guys ignore every shitposter? Why?

Isn't it obvious? I don't want to waste my time reading their posts.

I don't think it's necessary to ignore every single shitposter in the forum because there are too many, and it's almost an unending road, you ignore 100 and there will be 200 more in the next week.

If you don't ignore those 100, you'll be reading 300 of them the next week. That's the point of ignoring them.

The best way is to ignore such users the way how you ignore people or things in real life, pass by them, and behave and react like they don't exist.

That's literally what the Ignore button is for. I don't want to remember hundreds of shitposter names. IRL ignore lists are the future.

The ignore button should be used for absolutely annoying users

I'm glad everyone can use the Ignore button as they please

How about this as a (non-funny) compromise: I'll make it so that if you're holding down a certain key when you click the link, the confirmation will be skipped. (And maybe I can add that in a few other spots, too.)

Like shift-click? Isn't that browser dependent?

[Igebotz]

Do you guys ignore every shitposter? Why?

Isn't it obvious? I don't want to waste my time reading their posts.

The only downside is that we wouldn't know when a crap poster turned into a really good one if we ignored their profile for too long. It does not always happen, but it happens. I'm not a fan of "Ignore" button

[LoyceMobile]

The only downside is that we wouldn't know when a crap poster turned into a really good one

In that rare case, you'll see his quotes by other people and can unignore him.

[PowerGlove]

Like shift-click? Isn't that browser dependent?

I haven't really thought about it (much). What I had in mind when I suggested that was actually treating the "s" key like a modifier (s for "skip"). You mentioned some other confirmation dialogs that you wish weren't there, so it got me thinking about the potential usefulness of a new idiom for that (as in, it would be neat if all the links/buttons on Bitcointalk that lead to confirmation dialogs could be "s-clicked" by the people who don't appreciate hand-holding).

But, thinking just about the original issue: This whole problem only substantially manifests on touch devices, so perhaps the smartest way for me to handle it would be to use an event listener to watch for touch events and then only enable the confirmation dialog when it detects some. (The logic being that with a mouse, there's no real argument to be made that mistakes are happening at a rate that's worth doing anything about.)

What do you think of this?: (...)

Hmm... I like it, but, I also have some reservations about that idea (which I don't think are worth me getting into right now). I'll keep thinking about it.

[dkbit98]

That suggestion makes good sense to me.

I don't like this suggestion also.
Person who was accidently clicking ignore button would now be getting popups more often, and honestly that would annoy me much more than few ignored members.
Only good reason to have confirmation pop-up is when I am permanently deleting/changing something or closing my account.
Having to click confirm often would suck big time for 99.9% of forum members.

[joker_josue]

That suggestion makes good sense to me.

I don't like this suggestion also.
Person who was accidently clicking ignore button would now be getting popups more often, and honestly that would annoy me much more than few ignored members.
Only good reason to have confirmation pop-up is when I am permanently deleting/changing something or closing my account.
Having to click confirm often would suck big time for 99.9% of forum members.

Would it be possible to create an option in the user's profile for this "pop-up" to appear or not?
Whoever activates the option would receive this alert. Those who preferred not to have an alert, continued without an alert.

I thought about this in order to please both sides, and perhaps to avoid creating so much complexity in this whole process. Although it would probably require recording more information in the database, which may not be recommended.