Q: Could This (new discussion format) Be Any Worse?
-
Jul 5, 2014 8:14 AMby R C-R,Everybody that reaches level 2 (150 points) sees a "Report Post" link at the bottom of each reply. (Check the chart at the bottom of this page to see the levels, point required to reach them, & the privileges each one enables. That page is one of four linked to from Tutorials, the page you access from the Welcome page's 'new to the forums' link. It is worth reading them all if you have not done so already.)
When you are able to use that link, you will see a popup of six choices to indicate the primary reason you are reporting the post. They are:
• Inappropriate post
• Duplicate post
• Edit Post
• User name or profile issue
• Relocate post
• Other
Below that is a text box where you can type additional comments to explain why you think some action should be taken. As you can see, there are several reasons posts might be reported -- but bad grammar is not one of them!
And because the number of posts to ASC is so high that the mods can't reasonably be expected to read every one of them, it is not unlikely that a post gets pulled or edited because one (or more) users has reported it & the mods agree that the reasons mentioned for doing so are valid.
-
Jul 5, 2014 10:12 AMby Ronda Wilson,John Link wrote:
Ronda Wilson wrote:
MacPcConsultant wrote:
And the reason for the removal ? Is it because the truth was stated ?
It's anybody's guess. Only the Hosts and/or Moderators know for certain.
Bad language is often a reason.
As well it should be. For example, I presume that not using the subjunctive mood when it is clearly required is grounds for removal.
Nope; I don't think that would do it. You can borrow my sign, though, if you like:
-
Jul 5, 2014 10:14 AMby John Link,Ronda Wilson wrote:
John Link wrote:
Ronda Wilson wrote:
MacPcConsultant wrote:
And the reason for the removal ? Is it because the truth was stated ?
It's anybody's guess. Only the Hosts and/or Moderators know for certain.
Bad language is often a reason.
As well it should be. For example, I presume that not using the subjunctive mood when it is clearly required is grounds for removal.
Nope; I don't think that would do it. You can borrow my sign, though, if you like:
Thank you.
-
Jul 5, 2014 11:34 AMby Goldenbill,Hi Ronda! I used to "follow" you but somehow had lost the trail. Good to see you again.
My conception of this vast wasteland in the making is that the techies assigned to writing new code for Apple are learning the commercial tricks of taking the client to as many pages as possible before arriving at the desired destination, thereby exposing them to as many ads as possible. Apple techies are notoriously underpaid (I've heard) but they can use their "paid-internship" to sharpen their potential commercial future. i.e. Force us to jump to as many of their well crafted (if useless) pages as possible before they (maybe-maybe not) arrive at our desired destination. I'm losing my enthusiasm for Apple at an exponential rate, much to my dismay.
-----goldie
-
Jul 5, 2014 11:42 AMby Goldenbill,Hi Scott!
Just found this thread today, been gone for awhile. Don't have time to read 2500+ posts so tried to go to "branched to a new discussion" link which informed me I do not have authority to enter that page. Why is it offered if we cannot access it?
....goldie
-
Jul 5, 2014 1:03 PMby ChitlinsCC,Goldenbill wrote:
Even the "response" doesn't quote the actual post we are replying to.
Howdy Goldie
Look right below "Goldenbill" and the Time/Date in the image and see who you are replying to...
I think that the option to include the quote you are replying to should be optional, but in long threads sometimes even I get confused later on when I don't do it. In case you don't know
Adios amiga nueva
CCC
-- Animals can be driven crazy by placing too many in too small a pen. Homo Sapiens is the only animal that voluntarily does this to himself.
-
Jul 5, 2014 5:32 PMby Goldenbill,seventh-one!!
Looks like you got an instant response to "...no one has yet explained why Safari provides over-sized pages for my 20" iMac that need zooming out in Safari" I was using FF and it was in huge text. Now, a few hours later I'm back and it's in text I'm tempted to enlarge.
seventy one wrote:
Since I wrote on the 21st of June (a few posts above this one) I have to say I am slowly coming to terms with it all. It still takes ages to reply to some posts and there are a few odd ball changes; no one has yet explained why Safari provides over-sized pages for my 20" iMac that need zooming out in Safari > View menu, while Firefox is the right size without attention. Then there is the strange squared off message that tells me that an error has occurred in processing my request ... then promptly disappears leaving no sign of a problem at all.
But in the main I like the cleaner, uncluttered look, the Communities page and its' alternate features and the Content page, from which I can review past posts. Yes, we shall get used to it and with some refinements we may even grow to like it.
I got here by clicking on several "replied to xxxx" links below my/respondees Post Headings. From past experience though, I don't think I'll be able to find my way back to the first post I began my trace on. Seems we'd better quote the post we're responding to if we want any continuity in our conversations. The post I started with offered me the observation that the person I was responding to was encaptioned below my name at the head of the post. However, the time and date of the respondee (don't know what else to call the one you are responding to) and/or any reference to the subject matter or initial post is not included and as in this case there could be a string of posts to get to the original subject matter.
I'm sending this to you and then trying to retrace my steps to my original response inquiry. My this gets complicated.
I doubt I'll ever get "to like" having to take ten steps where once I needed only one. And they don't give us a preview either.
....goldie
-
Jul 5, 2014 5:42 PMby Goldenbill,babowa wrote:
Branched to a new discussion means that the hosts have removed one or more posts which are therefore no longer viewable by the general public.
As for RSS feeds, they are currently not available in this new iteration.
Thank you babowa. Just one more unnecessary step in my day's journey. The more I continue here the more confused I get. However, tis ever onward and upward (and methinkith, aroundword )
....goldie
-
Jul 5, 2014 5:55 PMby Goldenbill,ChitlinsCC wrote:
Goldenbill wrote:
Even the "response" doesn't quote the actual post we are replying to.
Howdy Goldie
Look right below "Goldenbill" and the Time/Date in the image and see who you are replying to...
I think that the option to include the quote you are replying to should be optional, but in long threads sometimes even I get confused later on when I don't do it. In case you don't know
Adios amiga nueva
CCC
-- Animals can be driven crazy by placing too many in too small a pen. Homo Sapiens is the only animal that voluntarily does this to himself.
Hi Chitlins!
I sent you a reply but i guess It went to seventy-one somewhere back there in the hinterlands since my reply to him is here at your feet.
I shall, henceforth, include the quote as you indicate since if I want to trace an original post (not the op of the thread but op of a sub-article,) I must thread my way through all the interveining posts to be sure I'm addressing the correct issue, then the reply comes to the post I am currently addressing. Oh PESHAW!
I'm outta here for a while, lol, I'm getting as batty as this new layout is. I'll be back, ..........after a rest.
....goldie
(edit) P.S. All we need here is a lot more conversation to wade through.
