VBulletin 5.0 - Feedback, Glitches, Etc.

[CanDB]

No problem. It might take awhile to get back to this. It gets busy.

It's all good. Just wanted to make my comments (you know me). As long as I'm here, I will seek to make this place the best it can be....at least from my perspective. I don't see everything that goes on, so I am not pretending that I have the best suggestions/plans.

[Peanut]

Thx for that. Just basing my opinions on what folks say, and past processes. Devaluation makes comparisons of contribution a little unwarranted.

No problem. It might take awhile to get back to this. It gets busy.

[CanDB]

Thank you for your input.

Some of your points have probably been mentioned somewhere in this thread. If you do a quick scan, I'm sure you'll find them.

Some of your suggestions have already been discussed by the mods. We will let you all know what we decide or if we are able to do it/them.




We each have our "comfort" groups. People we share the same opinions with, have the same type of humor... I know your group does it. I do it. That's my "thank you" to the other mods for the work they do (I know some members do that too), for game runners, for posts that have good information. For anything I want. That's part of the fun.



It's a popularity/buddy system with some level, hopefully to a high degree, of merit as well. That's what it's always been, even when we tried to change it.

Thx for that. Just basing my opinions on what folks say, and past processes. Devaluation makes comparisons of contribution a little unwarranted.

[Peanut]

Thank you for your input.

Some of your points have probably been mentioned somewhere in this thread. If you do a quick scan, I'm sure you'll find them.

Some of your suggestions have already been discussed by the mods. We will let you all know what we decide or if we are able to do it/them.

Having a "like" box to click on to see who sent the "like" is cool. But it took me a while to realize that I can see everyone else's. It then became abundantly clear that some folks are sending out a pile of likes, often to the same folks. Again, I don't care if you like to like, but it does seem to devalue the point system, just as it did before when CPs were restricted. I for example could theoretically lift a new member, say a friend, to various levels of recognition in very little time. If two or more of us combined our effort, it would happen very quickly. This is what the board was trying to steer clear of. And no offence, but I don't think any member here should have that capability. It becomes very much a popularity situation.

We each have our "comfort" groups. People we share the same opinions with, have the same type of humor... I know your group does it. I do it. That's my "thank you" to the other mods for the work they do (I know some members do that too), for game runners, for posts that have good information. For anything I want. That's part of the fun.

Otherwise just describe it for what it is, a popularity/buddy system with some level, hopefully to a high degree, of merit as well.

It's a popularity/buddy system with some level, hopefully to a high degree, of merit as well. That's what it's always been, even when we tried to change it.

[CanDB]

I am not sure where things are re: limits on "likes". Sounds funny just to say that. BUT I am just making a suggestion as to how this could shake out over time. First, I don't care how many likes we can give out, per day, per person, etc. If that's the way of the social media universe, so be it. Seems like a teenage thing, but that's the way of the land.

However, if this is tied to contribution points, I think some alterations should be considered. There are at least 2 elements that seem relevant to the CP world that come into play (IMO):
1) Some folks say they do not want to lose their status, given how long it took them to "earn" their points (in the pre "like" version)
2) Based on what happened before, when apparently groups were CPing their pals up the ladder to higher status, there was a change in the process to alter the accelerated upward momentum. Therefore, it seems it was deemed to be a negative response by individuals/groups to aid others by speeding up their rise in the CP value system.

Based on these two principles, I have a couple of suggestions:

1) Restrict "likes" as was the case with CPs. IF it can be done (again, sorry if this has been ruled out for sure)
2) If #1 can not be implemented, do away with the overall point system. Why? Because it goes against the logic behind the previous ruling of restricting CP usage.

Having a "like" box to click on to see who sent the "like" is cool. But it took me a while to realize that I can see everyone else's. It then became abundantly clear that some folks are sending out a pile of likes, often to the same folks. Again, I don't care if you like to like, but it does seem to devalue the point system, just as it did before when CPs were restricted. I for example could theoretically lift a new member, say a friend, to various levels of recognition in very little time. If two or more of us combined our effort, it would happen very quickly. This is what the board was trying to steer clear of. And no offence, but I don't think any member here should have that capability. It becomes very much a popularity situation.

OK....so if we do away with the total points, how do we define levels of success? First of course, one can grandfather current levels. No one loses their status.

The harder part is, what to do going forward, if likes can not be restricted similar to the CP process? And given I don't think anyone here should be able to hand out a bunch of them every day, especially to the same folks. So it is challenging. Simply telling members not to do it will never work. But when I see members giving out loads of them to some of the same people, I think we've lost sight of years of good rules and process.

Just my take. Again, restrictions would solve everything. But if not possible, some form of revamp. Otherwise just describe it for what it is, a popularity/buddy system with some level, hopefully to a high degree, of merit as well.

Thanks for listening. Just my opinion.

[CanDB]

That was mine and tweets prevent any editing... until the techs figure it out.

Unless a sweet tweet contains a video or some graphic, I think I'm going to go back to just copying & pasting the essential text of the tweet, perhaps hyperlinking it to the twitter page if people want to read more.

You caught me pal.....I was quoting you and your ridiculous tweet.....








J/K bud!!


Thx for the response!!!

[Rastic]

Maybe this will help...it's quotes 172 and 173 in the "All Broncos QBs Ineligible...." thread.

Desktop.

That was mine and tweets prevent any editing... until the techs figure it out.

Unless a sweet tweet contains a video or some graphic, I think I'm going to go back to just copying & pasting the essential text of the tweet, perhaps hyperlinking it to the twitter page if people want to read more.

This is correct.

The techies know about it and we are waiting on a fix.

[L.M.]

This may have been answered, but here goes.....when I tried to edit a post of mine, which was quoting a post, the screen shows my name but no post within. This happened once before but I worked around it. The quote I responded to had a tweet within. Not sure if that matters.

That was mine and tweets prevent any editing... until the techs figure it out.

Unless a sweet tweet contains a video or some graphic, I think I'm going to go back to just copying & pasting the essential text of the tweet, perhaps hyperlinking it to the twitter page if people want to read more.

[CanDB]

Did either post have an embedded tweet?

Was this desktop or mobile?

Maybe this will help...it's quotes 172 and 173 in the "All Broncos QBs Ineligible...." thread.

Desktop.

[Rastic]

This may have been answered, but here goes.....when I tried to edit a post of mine, which was quoting a post, the screen shows my name but no post within. This happened once before but I worked around it. The quote I responded to had a tweet within. Not sure if that matters.

Did either post have an embedded tweet?

Was this desktop or mobile?

[CanDB]

This may have been answered, but here goes.....when I tried to edit a post of mine, which was quoting a post, the screen shows my name but no post within. This happened once before but I worked around it. The quote I responded to had a tweet within. Not sure if that matters.

[Rastic]

I tried to upload an attachment and it said I wasn't authorized to do this. Haven't read through the entire thread so don't know if there is a reason for this. Or, how can you upload a URL and have the image show up instead of having to click the URL? sorry if this has been explained before.

Attachments are not allowed with the exception of avitars and sigs (I could be wrong on the last part, I'd have to look). For regular images used in posts use the image attachment button in the editor, enter the URL (and if an upload box is checked, uncheck it).

[Bronco51]

I tried to upload an attachment and it said I wasn't authorized to do this. Haven't read through the entire thread so don't know if there is a reason for this. Or, how can you upload a URL and have the image show up instead of having to click the URL? sorry if this has been explained before.

[Rastic]

Thanks, Rastic and tech team!

Aww, it's like an old friend came back

[Peanut]

I would like to see the original one brought back as well. It's funny you mentioned is being sarcastic - I thought it sort of looked that was too though what ever similarity there is was unintentional. There was apparently a problem with what carried over from the old site. I located a copy of the original and provided it to the tech team.

Fingers crossed.

Thanks, Rastic and tech team!