Little things that bug you/me about the forum

[Alone055]

While I'm typing this post, there's a Subject: field above it. That's the Subject of my post. If anything, you should wonder why most people don't use it, and why there's a default filled in already. I know the answer: it's quite convenient to leave it as is. But if I create a new post Subject, and you quote my post, you'll get the same Subject again (unless you change it).
It's a feature, not a bug.

Okay, makes sense, but then, isn't it better for posters to essentially stick to the same subject selected by the OP instead of changing it for each post? That's basically why most people don't change it, but if someone wants, they can abuse this feature just like how the guy I mentioned did.

I understood what you suggested initially and we may disagree, that's totally fine. I simply oppose your suggestion that the Subject of a topic should remain unchangeable for anybody else except the OP. You asked for opinions, you got mine. We don't need to find consensus.

Agreed, we're just discussing, no one needs to agree with each other in everything being said or proposed, and that's totally fine.

Let me add another thought regarding consequences of your suggestion:
If the OP is the only one to define the Subject for the whole thread, I would assume that the Subject should change for every post in a topic when the OP updates the topic's Subject, no? (Of course, the Subject for any other poster could remain unchanged but does this makes sense when you allow the OP to update the Subject and nobody else can change the Subject?)

That's how I believe it should be. If a topic is created, it should be discussed with the given title, and everyone should have the same subject when they are making their posts. Only because you are responding to someone else within a thread, you don't need to specifically change the subject line for it. As long as you are and the person you are responding to are on-topic, it shouldn't be a problem, imo.

Now think about the following potential of abuse:
An OP posts a topic with some agreeable or interesting Subject. Other users chime in and post: Yay, I like your topic... totally agree... whatever...
Later the fictional malicious OP changes Subject to something really nasty and/or offensive and above assumed update mechanics is imprinted on any poster of the topic/thread. I definitely wouldn't want this.

A good poster/user wouldn't do that, and if someone does, which is usually very rare because in all the years I've spent in this forum, I've not seen that happening much, but, even if someone does abuse it, we can report the thread to the mods and they will take care of it.

[LoyceV]

The watch and notify buttons on top and bottom of each page can be improved.

Currently behavior:
watch
Click it: "Watch or unwatch this topic?" OK.
unwatch
Click it: "Watch or unwatch this topic?" OK.

notify
Click it: "Are you sure you wish to enable notification of new replies for this topic?" OK.
notify
Click it: Are you sure you wish to disable notification of new replies for this topic?" OK.

Expected behavior:
watch
Click it: "Watch or unwatch this topic?" OK.
unwatch
Click it: "Watch or Unwatch this topic?" OK.

notify
Click it: "Are you sure you wish to enable notification of new replies for this topic?" OK.
unnotify
Click it: Are you sure you wish to disable notification of new replies for this topic?" OK.

[alegotardo]

Hello! I would like made a suggestion for improvement:
A optional feature for automatic/mandatory preview on the message before posting it.

There are probably more people like me who are too eager with the "post" to the point that they can barely finish writing and press it without even quickly checking the text first

The result of this isn't always good, its results in errors ranging from the simplest such as spelling problems, semantic or sentence agreement, to more serious ones with errors in the formation of tags that often end up making the entire post imposible to read, especially when it involves "QUOTEs".

I believe... would be useful if the user could somehow have the option to enable an automatic preview for all your posts when click on button "Post", then system display the message to the user and wait at least five seconds (or more, this can be self-configured too?) to check what they have written and then cancel in time if necessary. A similar feature already exists in several online clients' email that allow us cancel a premeditated sending.

Tks!


[EDIT]

Can the Post button and Preview button be more separated?

I don't know it any other person get bugged by this feature! as it's very easy for me to hit the post button when I just want to preview.

It occurs more when on mobile.

Practical example of a problem that this feature would already avoid.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

Been thinking about a way to make red flags raised against a user to be easily noticed so users do not have to go to profiles before knowing those who they should be cautious about. This recent Topic created by Charles-Tim validated my thoughts. Now himself was one of those who supported the red flag, but forgot about it since there is no immediate visibility for that.

I would suggest that for anyone that has a red flag raised against him and it gets the required support, their username in every post should appear in red(possibly dark red to blend with the colour scheme) to immediately notify/remind users of such flags and to be very cautious with such persons until possible expiration when their usernames returns to blue. This would not only notify users but discourage such person from posting further fraudulent schemes since he is already visibly a black sheep and knows no one would even take their offers seriously.

[joker_josue]

This isn't something that bothers me, but with the little controversy about votes vs merits in the pizza voting, I thought: what if it were possible for the OP to activate/deactivate the possibility of giving merits in his topic?

Just as you can choose to make a thread auto-moderated or not, you could choose whether the thread is eligible to circulate merits or not. Of course, by choosing that it is not possible to circulate merit, the OP itself cannot receive merit in that topic. This could help minimize the impact of merits, which some believe exist, on topics like pizza voting or members of the year.

I don't know to what extent, on a technical level, this would be minimally viable to implement, but the idea remains in the air. 

[LoyceV]

what if it were possible for the OP to activate/deactivate the possibility of giving merits in his topic?

I kinda expect this to create more problems than it solves. As a Merit source, I don't want the topic starter to be able to stop me from Meriting a post if I think it deserves it.

[_act_]

I don't know to what extent, on a technical level, this would be minimally viable to implement, but the idea remains in the air. 

To disable sending merit on a thread, theymos should be able to easily do that.

But is it worth it? No, it is not worth it at all. Pizza day is the celebration of the day bitcoin was first used in the purchase of something and which is Pizza.

People will take their time to make the Pizza, snap and post the image on this forum for the Pizza day celebration. That is worth more than merits.

I did not participated and neither had I applied on any merit giveaway before but if I see what that deserves, I can point to it.

[nutildah]

This isn't something that bothers me, but with the little controversy about votes vs merits in the pizza voting, I thought: what if it were possible for the OP to activate/deactivate the possibility of giving merits in his topic?

Well, when I brought the idea up in my "Disable merits in WO" thread, I remember you had this to say about it:

It would be completely unfair to block an area of the forum from merits, harming users who make a clear effort to write good content for the community.

Its one thread -- one thread in one child board of one subsection of the entire forum.

You're just helping me!

Which makes it even more difficult, technically speaking, to make a topic not capable of receiving merit. I don't know if you know programming, but the way the software works would require major changes for this to be done. It's one thing to configure a board for this limitation, another is a specific topic.

Furthermore, this could set a dangerous precedent where whenever the subject of a topic was bothersome, the merits would be disabled. Someone is very dangerous that line of reasoning.

Sounds like its a difficult change to make.

I'm for it, just like there's an option to lock a topic or disable its smileys. I can't think of an example for its usefulness right off the bat, other than the WO thread, which was already extremely popular before the invention of merits.

[bitmover]

I'm for it, just like there's an option to lock a topic or disable its smileys. I can't think of an example for its usefulness right off the bat, other than the WO thread, which was already extremely popular before the invention of merits.

Isn't it more efficient just to remove the meeting source status of the users who are abusing it.?

many posts in WO deserve merits. And many users there doesn't even have a signature campaign..  

[LoyceV]

Of many posts in WO deserve merits. And many users there doesn't even have a signature campaign..

WO always has been "a place on it's own". There's a reason the thread has different rules already, and the users who earned many thousands of Merits there aren't the problem. The problem (if there is such a thing) is that some Newbies use it to earn (or "farm") Merit, but that only works because some other users think their posts are worth it.

[nutildah]

Of many posts in WO deserve merits. And many users there doesn't even have a signature campaign.. 

Yeah so they don't need merits... not to re-open this can of worms but its long been a hive for merit farming suckups, who IMHO detract from the overall vibe of the WO.

The problem (if there is such a thing) is that some Newbies use it to earn (or "farm") Merit, but that only works because some other users think their posts are worth it.

These "other users" you speak of... a couple of them perpetuate the cycle and so the farmers return, like a festering plague. To be fair, sometimes people (myself included) don't even realize they are meriting an account farming weasel (and you probably don't even like their other accounts) until its too late.

[LoyceV]

These "other users" you speak of... a couple of them perpetuate the cycle and so the farmers return, like a festering plague. To be fair, sometimes people (myself included) don't even realize they are meriting an account farming weasel (and you probably don't even like their other accounts) until its too late.

All true. But I don't think that's enough to kill Merit in that thread.
Now that I think about it: Merit could be isolated there: I often see "+1 WO Merit" written in that topic. This could actually be made into a thing: WO Merit that only shows in the WO thread. Users could even have different ranks there than on the rest of the forum. And now that I type it, I don't think it's very useful (but it sounds fun).

[nutildah]

All true. But I don't think that's enough to kill Merit in that thread.

I suppose "popular consensus" deemed that it is not. I will live somehow, I suppose. However, I still think it would be fun to have an option to turn merits off when creating new threads. Could be useful if a thread creator wants to dissuade posters whose sole goal is to obtain merits...

Now that I think about it: Merit could be isolated there: I often see "+1 WO Merit" written in that topic. This could actually be made into a thing: WO Merit that only shows in the WO thread. Users could even have different ranks there than on the rest of the forum. And now that I type it, I don't think it's very useful (but it sounds fun).

I remember at some point one or two WO regulars did (somewhat jokingly) attempt to keep track of peoples' WOmerits. Then a "game" was even developed to use WOmerits for making price prediction bets.

[vapourminer]

These "other users" you speak of... a couple of them perpetuate the cycle and so the farmers return, like a festering plague. To be fair, sometimes people (myself included) don't even realize they are meriting an account farming weasel (and you probably don't even like their other accounts) until its too late.

All true. But I don't think that's enough to kill Merit in that thread.
Now that I think about it: Merit could be isolated there: I often see "+1 WO Merit" written in that topic. This could actually be made into a thing: WO Merit that only shows in the WO thread. Users could even have different ranks there than on the rest of the forum. And now that I type it, I don't think it's very useful (but it sounds fun).

we would game that system to the utmost maximum for the fun. +WOmerit banks, loans, staking, futures, im sure this could go on for.. a while. or not

i mean, come on its the WO

[joker_josue]

This isn't something that bothers me, but with the little controversy about votes vs merits in the pizza voting, I thought: what if it were possible for the OP to activate/deactivate the possibility of giving merits in his topic?

Well, when I brought the idea up in my "Disable merits in WO" thread, I remember you had this to say about it:

It would be completely unfair to block an area of the forum from merits, harming users who make a clear effort to write good content for the community.

Its one thread -- one thread in one child board of one subsection of the entire forum.

You're just helping me!

Which makes it even more difficult, technically speaking, to make a topic not capable of receiving merit. I don't know if you know programming, but the way the software works would require major changes for this to be done. It's one thing to configure a board for this limitation, another is a specific topic.

Furthermore, this could set a dangerous precedent where whenever the subject of a topic was bothersome, the merits would be disabled. Someone is very dangerous that line of reasoning.

Sounds like its a difficult change to make.

I'm for it, just like there's an option to lock a topic or disable its smileys. I can't think of an example for its usefulness right off the bat, other than the WO thread, which was already extremely popular before the invention of merits.

You're right... I was going against my own idea. I apologize for that.

Sometimes we hear so many controversies - often meaningless - that we end up thinking about something, without really thinking about it.


Based on the feedback, my idea, and based on my own feedback: I take it back! It really doesn't make sense to suggest this kind of situation. The community must learn to deal with these issues without any more "imposed" rules. Common sense must be used by all stakeholders when things that make less sense arise.


I'm sorry for bothering you with these thoughts, sometimes without thinking! 

[LoyceV]

The community must learn to deal with these issues without any more "imposed" rules.

People often ask for more rules (both IRL and here), but protecting the forum's freedoms is far more important than adding more restrictions. From what I've seen in my life, restrictions never go away and become more restricting.

[Alone055]

However, I still think it would be fun to have an option to turn merits off when creating new threads. Could be useful if a thread creator wants to dissuade posters whose sole goal is to obtain merits...

What about the ones who are actually making good posts in a thread where merits are off? I don't think it's reasonable to disable merits for everyone in a thread only because a few users might try to get merits by any means. Besides, the ones who are giving them merits must think they deserve it, and merits are not moderated, as far as I know, but that's not the actual point here. The point is, it's an injustice to those who actually make good posts and deserve getting merits.

A more viable and reasonable solution, imo, would be to deduct merits from a user's profile/account if they have got them in a self-moderated thread, and their post got removed by the creator of the thread. I suggested something similar before, but I said it should be done even for deleted posts from moderators, but since we are discussing this issue, I think it's at least a good solution for this problem.

Now, if something like that is applied, users who don't want merit abusers to come in their thread, and try to obtain merits, and if that happens, and abusers get merits for posts that the creator believes don't deserve it, the posts should be removed/deleted, and the merits received should get deducted from the receiver's merit count.

[Pablo-wood]

However, I still think it would be fun to have an option to turn merits off when creating new threads. Could be useful if a thread creator wants to dissuade posters whose sole goal is to obtain merits...

What about the ones who are actually making good posts in a thread where merits are off? I don't think it's reasonable to disable merits for everyone in a thread only because a few users might try to get merits by any means. Besides, the ones who are giving them merits must think they deserve it, and merits are not moderated, as far as I know, but that's not the actual point here. The point is, it's an injustice to those who actually make good posts and deserve getting merits.

Since the merit system is centralized, there's always going to be some level of personal opinion and control that users just have to tolerate. Still, completely disabling merit in a thread feels like punishing everyone for the actions of a few. It's better to address merit abuse directly than to limit the ability of genuine contributors to be recognized and appreciated.

A more viable and reasonable solution, imo, would be to deduct merits from a user's profile/account if they have got them in a self-moderated thread, and their post got removed by the creator of the thread. I suggested something similar before, but I said it should be done even for deleted posts from moderators, but since we are discussing this issue, I think it's at least a good solution for this problem.

Now, if something like that is applied, users who don't want merit abusers to come in their thread, and try to obtain merits, and if that happens, and abusers get merits for posts that the creator believes don't deserve it, the posts should be removed/deleted, and the merits received should get deducted from the receiver's merit count.

Engagement in self-moderated threads would likely drop significantly if such a rule were implemented. Lets consider instances where users with valid but differing opinions from the thread creator (OP) might hesitate to post, not only because their replies could be deleted, but also because any merit earned could be revoked. This creates a poor effect on open discussion. Every suggestion has two sides, and often, those who push for stricter rules end up being affected by them eventually.

[Alone055]

Engagement in self-moderated threads would likely drop significantly if such a rule were implemented. Lets consider instances where users with valid but differing opinions from the thread creator (OP) might hesitate to post, not only because their replies could be deleted, but also because any merit earned could be revoked. This creates a poor effect on open discussion. Every suggestion has two sides, and often, those who push for stricter rules end up being affected by them eventually.

When you visit a self-moderated thread, there is a line on top of the OP that says:



So, most of us already know the rules of a self-moderated thread, and we know that any of our posts in such a thread can get removed anytime, and it's up to us whether we want to post there or not. Those who know their views and opinions differ from the OP of a self-moderated thread, and they know they are going to write something that could get deleted, they shouldn't post it there, but should create a new thread and write their post there and give a reference to it, not making it self-moderated so that everyone can post there. We often see this happening, and there is nothing wrong with that.

[LoyceV]

A more viable and reasonable solution, imo, would be to deduct merits from a user's profile/account if they have got them in a self-moderated thread, and their post got removed by the creator of the thread. I suggested something similar before, but I said it should be done even for deleted posts from moderators, but since we are discussing this issue, I think it's at least a good solution for this problem.

I'll only provide one counter-argument: what if a topic starter goes crazy and wipes everything? Some users could even drop back in Rank if that wiped their Merit.
Yes, I'm thinking about what Ratimov did:

I noticed Ratimov has been deleting content from his own topics, after which he must have reported it and Mods deleted the topics (in that post I linked 58 topics). Speculation is this is to hide traces of his past plagiarism, but I can't know his reasons for sure. The timing is at least peculiar after his DT1-status was questioned again.

He now also deleted 6 of my posts from his self-moderated topics, and deleted all other posts from others users too.
I find it utterly disrespectful to do this on a forum. It also means I never want to post in any of his self-moderated topics again, so Ratimov is now on my Ignore list.

Ratimov - 2 Years on Bitcointalk + Giveaway !!!: 69 posts, 46 Merits earned.
6k Merit Club. When is Legendary ?: 74 posts, 12 Merits earned.

Here's another forum suggestion: Some users turned the title of their posts (or more likely: topics) into something that can't be clicked. You'll have to look at the page source to find the link now. Even if it's empty, clicking the link would at least show the topicID, which allows to look it up on external archives.
Would it be possible to make something other than the title clickable? Say the post number, the date, or even the "/"?