Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    The Wish Void    Complaints II « previous next »
Author Topic: Complaints II  (Read 4275 times)
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Print
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« on: 04-27-2013 23:42 »
« Last Edit on: 06-19-2013 20:02 »

Since the old one is closed, I'm putting my complaint in a new thread. Hopefully none of the moderators feel that I'm taking undue action by doing so.

Anyway, the "mark all replies as read" feature is incredibly annoying. When trying to read PMs, I often click it by accident.

This has the effect of leaving me without indicators for new replies to read (and possibly unaware that somebody has said something that I should make them feel about six inches tall for tongue ).

The "new replies" indicators are one of the really cool, user-friendly things about PEEL. It would be nice if the "mark all replies as read" button brought up an "are you sure?" dialogue box, where you have to put a tick in a box and then click "yes, I am sure" to confirm.

I don't know how trivial or complex this would be to implement. It's a suggestion that I suppose will join the ranks of my appeal for the canonisation of the facepalm smiley.

But I feel better for having made my complaint, and I hope that somebody who can address this will at least read it (though I understand that reading it and having time to address it are two very different beasts).
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #1 on: 04-28-2013 01:57 »

I've had that happen a few times, but not enough to actively take action on it. I just must be less popular to message than others tongue
any1else

Space Pope
****
« Reply #2 on: 04-28-2013 13:29 »

I believe I have complained about this very issue at least twice this year. I don't think I complained about it in here, though. I am just putting in my second to this emotion of frustration.  smile I mean, mad
UnrealLegend

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #3 on: 04-29-2013 00:47 »

I've done this before as well when PEELing from my phone. I definitely support this proposed change.
Frida Waterfall

Professor
*
« Reply #4 on: 05-01-2013 18:21 »

What the hell happened to my thread? It was a news thread that was merged with another, crappier news thread. I made the thread very formal and informational so then it could become the successor to the recently-locked news thread.
Eternium

Professor
*
« Reply #5 on: 05-01-2013 20:08 »

That is excactely what I was wondering about... Tough 2 news threads were pretty much annoying, yours was a lot better.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #6 on: 05-01-2013 21:35 »

What the hell happened to my thread? It was a news thread that was merged with another, crappier news thread.

I think you've answered your own question there. The threads were merged, since there's no need for two news threads. The old thread was locked, some n00b made the next one, and yours was created a couple of days later. Now I'm no expert on the flow of time, but I'm fairly certain that this means the n00b got there first. Granted, the first post wasn't anything that warranted them starting a thread in the first place, but discussion quickly reached the point where Futurama news and such was being talked about.

You really ought to have known better than to start a new thread in the first place. It's in the manual.
Frida Waterfall

Professor
*
« Reply #7 on: 05-02-2013 00:21 »

I am well aware of the orders and etiquette of PEEL, and thus is why I made a formal news thread in the first place. I still think it didn't warrant a total merger.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #8 on: 05-02-2013 00:35 »

Then you either didn't read the rules, didn't understand them, or didn't think they applied to you. No matter which scenario, you should feel thoroughly ashamed.
Tastes Like Fry

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #9 on: 05-02-2013 04:42 »

First in best dressed.
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #10 on: 05-02-2013 11:47 »

I've had that happen a few times, but not enough to actively take action on it. I just must be less popular to message than others tongue

Now that I said that, it happened to me. Curses! I don't know how I clicked that on the phone!
Meerkat54

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #11 on: 05-02-2013 13:52 »
« Last Edit on: 05-02-2013 13:54 »

I thought the other thread got closed? Forever?

Anywho, I'm waiting to see if, as well as the facepalm smiley, a YouTube button shortcut pops up in the main editing section of the message thing. That'd be kinda handy for some peeps on the run. ;p

Also, when threads get locked, I notice that you can't quote any posts anymore, which is quite annoying in some cases, since you can't easily quote someone's entire comment onto another topic or whatever. So if that could be fixed as well, that'd be swell. x)

(Yes, I know this isn't a wish void, but I thought I'd put in a bit more of a post than just questioning the continuation of the complaints thread... Plus they are kinda complaints. tongue)
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #12 on: 05-02-2013 16:52 »

Hey, you filled up the complaint thread! No more complaints!
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #13 on: 05-02-2013 22:43 »

I've had that happen a few times, but not enough to actively take action on it. I just must be less popular to message than others tongue

Now that I said that, it happened to me. Curses! I don't know how I clicked that on the phone!

If I'm ever feeling particularly devilish, I think I'll start sending random PEELers PMs just to see if they accidentally hit the "Mark All Replies as Read" button instead of the "Personal Messages" button. And then when they actually read my PM, it'll say, "Just checking to see if you accidentally hit the wrong button before hitting the correct one to check this message. Please write back to let me know!" And then when they write me back I'll probably hit the wrong button at first, too, thus repeating the cycle ad infinitum.

Also:

I am well aware of the orders and etiquette of PEEL, and thus is why I made a formal news thread in the first place. I still think it didn't warrant a total merger.

What was so informal about the first thread, besides the admittedly irksome problems with spelling and punctuation (which in the grand scheme of things aren't even that big a deal; the word "discussion" is misspelled in the General Disscussion sub-forum, after all, so I think we've always been kind of lax about these things)? If we were allowed to start new threads on the same topic just because we felt the preexisting thread for that topic was shitty, this board would quickly become overcrowded with copycat threads created merely to try and outdo one another with cleverness or whatever.  
Frida Waterfall

Professor
*
« Reply #14 on: 05-03-2013 02:00 »

Then you either didn't read the rules, didn't understand them, or didn't think they applied to you. No matter which scenario, you should feel thoroughly ashamed.

I do not know humiliation.

Hey, that news thread went several days without being stickied, and still has yet to be stickied. The other thread about Futurama's cancellation in no way says "news thread" to me other than how it was stickied just after the former news thread was locked and unstickied.

First in best dressed.

Thank you! I felt that PEEL deserves better. Call it PEEL exceptionalism or suPEELiority.

I'm more or less content with the spelling/grammatical change made with the title of the current "news" thread. Not great, but at least it won't make my (and other PEELers) OCD nazism click.

What was so informal about the first thread, besides the admittedly irksome problems with spelling and punctuation (which in the grand scheme of things aren't even that big a deal; the word "discussion" is misspelled in the General Disscussion sub-forum, after all, so I think we've always been kind of lax about these things)?

I've only noticed the misspelling in the General Discussion title and description recently in the past month or two. At least that wasn't very blatantly obvious. What really annoyed me was that the original post of the thread was something you would find in a text message. Not just the lack of proper capitalization/etc., but the post was one sentence that didn't bring any kind of proper introduction or bring any new information to the table. No offense to the newbie and all (well, actually some offense), but she should have left the creation of major threads to the veterans.


If we were allowed to start new threads on the same topic just because we felt the preexisting thread for that topic was shitty, this board would quickly become overcrowded with copycat threads created merely to try and outdo one another with cleverness or whatever. 

You and I are enemies now.

That's utter bullshit. We're simply too lazy to do that.
sparkybarky

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #15 on: 05-03-2013 02:50 »

No offense to the newbie and all (well, actually some offense), but she should have left the creation of major threads to the veterans.

Wha--? Why? That smacks of n00bism.
Frida Waterfall

Professor
*
« Reply #16 on: 05-03-2013 03:32 »

Wha--? Why? That smacks of n00bism.

Well, when you are new anywhere, you need to learn about the rules and order and with that, gain some experience. It is common for any rookies to first watch, then after understanding the rhyme and reason, do. I don't really have anything against newbies, but before you do something major, at least know the ins-and-outs of the community.
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #17 on: 05-03-2013 04:47 »

Wha--? Why? That smacks of n00bism.

Quote
That smacks of n00bism.

Quote
n00bism

Quote
n00bism

Quote
-ISM

* Xanfor twitches.
Frida Waterfall

Professor
*
« Reply #18 on: 05-03-2013 05:03 »

Xanfor, do you not like -isms? Euphemisms, prisms, bosoms.

Also, nice to hear from you again. Haven't seen you around in the on-topic discussion. We always welcome your sagely input.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #19 on: 05-03-2013 05:49 »

No offense to the newbie and all (well, actually some offense), but she should have left the creation of major threads to the veterans.

Like sparky, I find your opinion on this matter somewhat offensive. You assume that new threads are most frequently created by established posters as part of some implicit understanding new posters have that they themselves would be ill-equipped thread-starters--but really, the only reason new installments of recently-closed threads tend to be created by so-called veterans is because they know that once a thread hits page twenty they can pounce on the opportunity to create the new one before anyone else does so (and with an inferior title, no doubt). I think that's what happened in your case; it's just that you weren't fast enough. And now, quite frankly, you're being disrespectful to a poster who technically did nothing wrong and are passing it off as your prerogative as someone who just happens to have been here longer. And that, to me, is kind of lousy and entitled behavior.

More importantly, your thinking itself (as I understand it, at least) is kind of paradoxical, and it still doesn't justify the creation of a new thread when another thread on the same topic already exists. Since there's no official rule prohibiting new posters from creating threads, but there is a pretty well-established rule prohibiting any poster from creating an unnecessary duplicate thread--and there exists a common understanding of n00bs as people who, unwittingly or not, routinely break rules--your behavior was ultimately more n00bish. 

In short, by doing what you did, you--an established poster--made yourself look like, well, a n00b with no respect for or understanding of the rules (like tnuk already said). So, by your own line of thinking, we should temporarily ban you from the opening of new threads. I'm not suggesting we do so, of course; I'm just trying to follow your own thinking to its logical conclusion. I'll admit to being a somewhat illogical person myself, so feel free to correct me if I've misrepresented you here.

If we were allowed to start new threads on the same topic just because we felt the preexisting thread for that topic was shitty, this board would quickly become overcrowded with copycat threads created merely to try and outdo one another with cleverness or whatever. 

That's utter bullshit. We're simply too lazy to do that.

Seems that you weren't too lazy to try. Also, considering how frequently people use the first page of a new thread to suggest better names, we're certainly industriousness enough to register our complaints about lousy titles. It's just that we do so in a way that does not technically break the rules...which is the best kind of non-rule-breaking.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #20 on: 05-03-2013 06:25 »

I think it's kind of lame when new posters open up really old threads. I feel like there should be a 5 year rule or something to delete older threads since they're no longer in use/relevant/closed. Or not. Do whatever. No pressure.
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #21 on: 05-03-2013 07:35 »

I think it's kind of lame when new posters open up really old threads. I feel like there should be a 5 year rule or something to delete older threads since they're no longer in use/relevant/closed. Or not. Do whatever. No pressure.

How. Dare. You. I am futurefreak, the thread necromancer. Don't you take that right away from me!

I too, would like the facepalm smiley. But that's more a wish than a complaint. Ok I'll stop cluttering up this thread starting...now.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #22 on: 05-03-2013 08:06 »

I think it's kind of lame when new posters open up really old threads. I feel like there should be a 5 year rule or something to delete older threads since they're no longer in use/relevant/closed. Or not. Do whatever. No pressure.

How. Dare. You. I am futurefreak, the thread necromancer. Don't you take that right away from me!


Seems like a conflicting statement. I mean you're a freak of the future, wouldn't you be disinterested in the past?

Ok I'll stop cluttering the thread.
Meerkat54

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #23 on: 05-19-2013 05:42 »

Unable to quote!.. people's posts!.. on locked threads!.. Fix, you lazy mods, fix! Argh!! tongue mad
Tachyon

Space Pope
****
« Reply #24 on: 05-19-2013 06:21 »


Al it takes is a little effort, Kat.  You can figure out a workaround.

winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #25 on: 05-19-2013 18:42 »

It takes about five minutes worth of effort to do it correctly manually though.

I also doubt it was an intended feature necessarily.
Meerkat54

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #26 on: 05-22-2013 06:21 »

I know I can do it manually, I just find it annoying that you can't just automatically quote people's posts so easily using that button. I'm not that great with [][/] script things! tongue
TheMadCapper

Fluffy
UberMod
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #27 on: 05-22-2013 16:51 »

Brackets, young grasshopper. Brackets and forward slashes.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #28 on: 05-22-2013 17:47 »

Brackets, young grasshopper. Brackets and forward slashes.
Quantum Neutrino Field

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #29 on: 05-22-2013 18:13 »

^ laff That sums it up.

Also, not complaints but questions. What is preferred thread for questions about PEEL anyway?
What does "Show others your online status?" do, because I haven't seen that online status anywhere.
And those PE-logos next to board categories, are they implying recent activity, when they are red?
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #30 on: 05-22-2013 21:02 »

I think that having the "show online status" option enabled means that, if you're signed in and browsing PEEL, you are counted among the "Users Online" noted at the bottom of the main page. And you're right about the colored logos: they indicate that there are unread posts in 'x' number of threads in any given sub-forum.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #31 on: 05-23-2013 04:51 »

Brackets, young grasshopper. Brackets and forward slashes.

You'll need more than that to make quotes from locked threads correctly.  Meerkat is right though, it'd be a lot easier if the quote button didn't just disappear when the thread got locked.
Tastes Like Fry

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #32 on: 06-19-2013 06:35 »

Not really a complaint but I'm not sure where to put this, News thread is on 23 pages, should maybe a mod lock it?
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #33 on: 06-19-2013 07:03 »

Not really a complaint but I'm not sure where to put this, News thread is on 23 pages, should maybe a mod lock it?

I think that it's being allowed to run until new Futurama airs. That's what's happened in the past. Then we'll get a new news thread, and this abortion will presumably be locked, too. Considering what happened last time she started a clone of an existing thread, Frida should have known better than to open that. no no

Tastes Like Fry

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #34 on: 06-19-2013 08:09 »

Thanks tnuk, I just don't think I've ever seen a thread over 21 pages before, was wondering if it was going to cause an apocalypse or something.

I also though Frida should have known better, considering she's at Professor level as well, and not just some poppler.
Just Fan
Starship Captain
****
« Reply #35 on: 06-19-2013 09:24 »

I'd vote for Frida's News thread to be kept open... because of its well-written first message.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #36 on: 06-19-2013 15:21 »
« Last Edit on: 06-19-2013 15:22 »

Your vote appears to have been counted, Just Fan; Frida's thread is indeed the one that most people are posting in, thus solidifying its status as the "official" thread.

Of course, the whole problem of having to "vote" for one new thread over another should not exist in the first place. I don't see what is so difficult to understand about the opening and closing of threads: Post in the first thread even if it reaches twenty pages (provided that your posts are on-topic, and not just of the "OMGZ guise this thread is still open WTF is up with that?" variety), and once a mod stumbles upon the thread and closes it, someone can open a new thread. This new thread, regardless of how silly its title may be or how annoying you may find its progenitor, becomes the official thread. Of course, it should preferably be opened by a person who has both a good idea for a title and something meaningful to say about the thread's topic--but these are never guaranteed.

The point here is that I'm getting sick of all the madness that occurs in both on- and off-topic when a thread reaches twenty pages and is not closed: either people start wondering aloud whether the old, bloated thread will be closed in a timely fashion (which, you know, eats up space on the dreaded page twenty, greatly increasing the possibility of the thread reaching page twenty-one) or they prematurely open threads and create an unnecessary decision for people who must figure out whether to continue posting in the old thread until the bitter end (which is what I think ought to be done) or post in the new thread (which may be closed by a mod anyway to teach its creator a lesson...which he or she will probably never learn, regardless).

Sorry to be so rant-y, but this whole prematurely-opening-new-threads thing is among my biggest PEEL pet peeves.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #37 on: 06-19-2013 19:49 »

I actually completely disagree with you.  Originally there was no 20 page limit; then one was introduced; which I actually like, it differentiates peel and hypothetically makes it a lot neater.

When there was a 20 page limit, people often made a new thread when the old one reached 20 pages, sometimes it reached twenty pages deliberately and sometimes people were banned for stretching the good nature of the open rule.  If a thread wasn't 20 pages yet, and a new one cropped up, then the new one got closed because that's cheating.  So really the only hard set rule, which wasn't totally hard set was that the old thread had to be on page 20.

This ultimately creates an interesting dynamic where different people would compete for interesting titles to name the thread; sometimes multiple threads would emerge and one would win out.  I prefer the 20 page rule to the closed thread rule because then the new thread naming is based on free market principles.  Everyone has a choice and can affect the outcome.  This is distinctly different from the closed thread rule because then we have to wait for an arbitrary mod to close a thread, and this can lead to gamed advantages.

For example, say I'm friends with ~FazeShift~ and I pm him to close a thread.  He's already up, and now I have a 93% advantage for the thread to be closed within a short amount of time, so now I can make a new thread.  In this case though, Tweek is also up and he closes the thread before ~FazeShift~ can get a chance to read my pm, and then Tweek makes the new thread.  Also, with the thread closing issue, the moderators either have to sit out for naming threads (unfair in my opinion) or end up having a super significant advantage in opening a new thread (unfair in my opinion).
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #38 on: 06-19-2013 20:01 »
« Last Edit on: 06-19-2013 20:03 »

Does it really matter who makes and names the thread, as long as the discussion is continued smoothly, and isn't overwhelmed by trivial nonsense such as people either padding out the thread to reach page 20, or starting the new thread without making a cromulent contribution?

In an ideal world, people would also remember to link to the old thread from the first post of the new one. But I won't harp on too much about that, since I'm as guilty as anybody of forgetting to do that.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #39 on: 06-19-2013 23:33 »

Linking to the old thread is probably a decent elective convention.. and if it became a social normative, then perhaps whether the thread creator does it or not, someone else could just as easily upon opening.

That said, discussions are important, but sometimes I think fun is more important; a competition that doesn't truly matter, because we don't just come here to have mandatory discussions.  Furthermore, everyone's ideal discussions is a matter of opinion and so although all conversations are technically equal, some are more equal than others.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.226 seconds with 18 queries.
http://www.peelified.com/Futurama-Forum-10/Topic-24004-0-Complaints_II.html
www.peelified.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2015-14
128521
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:VAVYCMQTU7QICZROQWEH7BSKB2ZKP7UI
<urn:uuid:174f3019-536f-48b2-b50a-da7cfccf578a>
2015-04-01T17:52:30Z
80.67.28.169
sha1:MBXVDQN6RRHECKHN35TJ6ZWKPW5MK547
<urn:uuid:10429e65-d766-4495-9f01-5f8ee3d1ec9c>
http://www.peelified.com/Futurama-Forum-10/Topic-24004-0-Complaints_II.html
length
response
<urn:uuid:917d57e0-203f-41c5-85bd-0b23b913d320>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-168-14-71.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-14
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for March 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf