This is topic New forum changes in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001459
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 01:49 AM:
 
If anyone experiences problems with the new forum, please post here and be sure to describe the problem AND include the operating system you are using (Windows/Mac/etc) as well as the browser you are using (Internet Explorer 6/Netscape/etc).

There are a lot of new features this forum program will give us, and there are some very cool things coming soon. A HUGE thanks goes to Daryl C. W. O'Shea for dedicating so much time with coding! [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 11-18-2002, 02:23 AM:
 
Daryl has it together. Good computer tech!

Brad, the new facelift looks great. However, I had to dump the cookies in IE-6 with Win 2000 to get past the "no bookmarking allowed" screen. Then everything ran fine for both Oprah and IE.

I do miss the border between the picture of the poster and his/her text. It looks a little off-balance without that. You guys did an excellent job in the new facelift.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 02:41 AM:
 
:thompson:

Ooops! [Eek!] I bet Paul's going to take that back.

Add it to the things to do. At least you've got new ones to play with in the meantime.

- I thought I was going to bed... [sleep]
 
Posted by Lionel Fouillen (Member # 1475) on 11-18-2002, 03:21 AM:
 
quote:
I do miss the border between the picture of the poster and his/her text. It looks a little off-balance without that. You guys did an excellent job in the new facelift.
Agree with all that. And I love these new icons [sex] [puke]

The only real problem: my picture disappeared. I'm using WinXP/IE6 but I think it was probably mistakingly deleted...
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 03:45 AM:
 
Your picture is showing here Lionel.

By the way, with all of the converting and transferring and re-coding (manually I might add) of member pictures, it is entirely possible that some people's pictures won't show up because I made a typo or forgot to upload something. If this happens, just let me know.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 03:46 AM:
 
I fixed it.

Carl Martin's is missing too.
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-18-2002, 03:46 AM:
 
Way cool, guys! Great job! [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 03:47 AM:
 
I thought you were going to sleep an hour and a half ago! So much for sleep, eh? It's overrated anyway.

Already searched for Carl's. I don't seem to have it anywhere.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 03:48 AM:
 
I'm getting my weekend in now. [Big Grin]

Now it's definetely time to go to sleep if I want to make a class before noon.
 
Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 11-18-2002, 04:41 AM:
 
When I Login on IE6 w/ Windows ME the message "you are not logged in" still appears after clicking the link. Still, when I post, I don't have to sign in.

However, this is not an issue with Opera 6.05. Everything's fine and dandy.

I've also just noticed I am member number 666 [evil]
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 04:56 AM:
 
The idea of logging in is so that you can log in once, and then do anything you need on the forums without having to mess with it again. If you have a static IP address, you can log in once and forget about it (at least until you reboot your computer).
 
Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 11-18-2002, 05:08 AM:
 
Brad, it looks fine.
Would it be an idea to post a list of the number of users country by country? I'm curious to know how many nations are represented here.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 05:12 AM:
 
I think that's asking for a huge pain of a script. The only way to do something like that would be to search out each member's profiles, and not everyone's location is entered the same. So even if it could be done, I doubt it would be that accurate.
 
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-18-2002, 05:30 AM:
 
It all works fine here. BTW, a previous glitch appears to have gone. Using IE6 with service pack 1 running under Windows 2K service pack 3, you used to have to press 'refresh' when a topic displayed after entering or editing a post. It now updates automatically.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-18-2002, 07:23 AM:
 
So far, everything seems fine. The "sig" files seemed to have vanished though.

On Netscape 4.7 the reply window goes on longer than my screen (width wise). On IE it fits nicely. (These are running on a PC Win98SE)

A feature I would like is, instead of the topic started but the last post by column.

Steve
 
Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 11-18-2002, 09:24 AM:
 
Steve beat me to the draw. The reply window is huge. Netscape 4.7 here, too.
 
Posted by Brad Haven (Member # 954) on 11-18-2002, 09:56 AM:
 
Well done!!
You guys have been busy! [beer]
 
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 11-18-2002, 10:29 AM:
 
Great job Daryl and Brad!

The post preview is a great addition (Am I crazy, that is new, right?), as are the Instant Graemlins. Are the rest of the smilies going to be returning? I'm just curious. Nice work. I haven't had any problems with any of the past or new features thus far.
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 11-18-2002, 10:50 AM:
 
I just got here, but so far this is looking great!
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-18-2002, 11:57 AM:
 
When I first come to the site, I see the first three forums lit up since they have new posts. I go into FHF and read the nonsense there. Once I am done I click on the "Film-Tech Forums" logo that I spent many minutes creating in the upper left corner of the screen to return to the forum index. Now it doesn't show any of the other forums as having unread topics. I go into other forums and it is difficult to tell which threads have new responses since they are all the same color.
 
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 11-18-2002, 12:27 PM:
 
As with all new things, I got scared, but now am ok! [Smile]

As others have said, I miss the line between the pic/info and the actual post. No biggie, but it satisfies my mild obsessive compulsiveness of things needing to be in order.

Paul G. Thompson wrote:
quote:
Then everything ran fine for both Oprah and IE.
I always knew she was a lurker here! [Wink]

The ease of inserting smilies and UBB is awesome. Great job guys!

=TMP=
 
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 11-18-2002, 12:44 PM:
 
I came to film-Tech this morning and saw that there were new posts. I immediately saw the log in notice and logged in. When I did the new post indications disappeared.

And my picture is missing in action.
 
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-18-2002, 01:05 PM:
 
Brad, (et al)
The new and improved site looks great thusfar. I like the fact that you now longer have to type in your password to post, as you do that when you "log on". [sex] [puke] Broadway16@sc.rr.com And all the new things to play with are cool as well.. [Big Grin] [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 01:43 PM:
 
Ian's pic is fixed.

Joe, this forum has been modified with "smarter" cookies than how it came stock from the manufacturer. So long as you use your back button all should work fine. When you are finished reading, click the forums logo.

EDIT - Ok, now I know why you complained. Once you make a post having to go back kinda sucks. Daryl already improved the cookie situation 100 times over. Maybe he can fix that glitch somehow. That kind of coding is beyond me.
 
Posted by Daniel Boisson (Member # 1027) on 11-18-2002, 02:40 PM:
 
The new look is great [thumbsup]

These are pretty nice as well. [sex]

Everything seems to work fine for me in XP
 
Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 11-18-2002, 03:28 PM:
 
The new site is better. Maybe I'm missing this but is there a SPELL CHECKER on Post A Reply.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 04:00 PM:
 
I have never heard of a spell check feature on an online forum. Could you direct me to a site that has one?
 
Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 11-18-2002, 04:24 PM:
 
I was just getting comfortable learning how to post on the old system.
Now I will have to learn all over again. I must say, you guy's are making me feel old. Oh Well!! Martini time [thumbsup] [Smile]
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 11-18-2002, 04:38 PM:
 
Brad, I accepted your challenge [Big Grin] and googled a forum with a spell checker of sorts: some other board . You have to register but it's quick & anonymous (of course I registered with a trash email account). When you're registered, and create a new thread or a reply, there is a spell-checker option. Looks like you would copy your text into the spell-checker, run the check, then copy the corrected text back into your post. A little clumsy but it works.

Check out their Smilies!
 
Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 11-18-2002, 04:49 PM:
 
Brad, I can't think of any online forum with a spell checker. I thought AOL instant messenger had some sort of spell checker. Would it be hard to add a spell check to this form? It would benefit many people.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2002, 05:18 PM:
 
It's not integrated into their forum. It is nothing more than a link to http://www.spellonline.com
 
Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 11-18-2002, 05:38 PM:
 
Well done you guys. All's great at my 'down under' desk.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 07:09 PM:
 
The new post indicator cookies are definitely a problem, but like Brad said, at least they don't stay turned on for three weeks after you've already seen a post.

Until it gets worked out, try setting your browser to cache pages, if it is not already. Make good use of your back button (or mouse gestures) too.

Spell checker, then we couldn't make fun of your atrocious spelling. [Razz]
 
Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 11-18-2002, 08:09 PM:
 
Brad thanks for the link. Atrcious spelling .... who me? [Razz]

-Will-
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-18-2002, 08:20 PM:
 
OK in Mac OS 9 using IE (the ONLY decent Mac browser in OS 9) the back button does not function when making a post, e.g. if I go to the "post a reply" screen and then press the "back" button on the browser, it does nothin' but reload the page. I actually have to hold down the back button and select a previous URL to go back to. This may be an IE 5 issue. Also I still get the "No boomarking" in the scrollable box below which is supposed to display the last few posts, etc.

Who made the "sex" icon? Not me. I made most of the icons here but I want everybody to know that I did not do the sex icon. If I did it would be much more graphic! Also the member icons have disappeared. :ian:
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 10:08 PM:
 
Windows IE5.0 can 'go back' after a post. Maybe it's a MAC thing. I can't really tell, I don't have IE5 on my MAC emulator.

quote:
Who made the "sex" icon? Not me. I made most of the icons here but I want everybody to know that I did not do the sex icon. If I did it would be much more graphic!
More graphic... you would have made an embeded video. [Eek!]
 
Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 11-18-2002, 10:23 PM:
 
I'm so confused!!!

Looks good though! [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-18-2002, 10:41 PM:
 
Wow, I just tried the search function and was sent directly to the post with my search term! Not the thread, not the page, but the post! [Cool]
 
Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 11-18-2002, 10:51 PM:
 
Looks great and generally works fine under IE 5.1 under Mac OS X. Great work, all! [thumbsup]

The only quirk carrried over from the previous version of the site is that the "No Bookmarking Allowed" pane still appears instead of the thread preview in the Post A Reply window. Guess that's the price I pay for using Internet Exploiter instead of another browser...
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 11:02 PM:
 
That shouldn't happen in the new version nor the old. Did it ever work (display the thread in the inline frame) for you? It could be the way the MAC version of IE calls the inline frame. Does anyone else on a MAC have this problem?
 
Posted by Rick Long (Member # 213) on 11-18-2002, 11:28 PM:
 
A question, how does the log-in proceedure affect potential new members who just wanna lurk until they feel comfortable enough to join?

B.T.W. love the "preview post" feature.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-18-2002, 11:39 PM:
 
I've just checked the configuration and tried visiting the forums from a computer that's never accessed the site before. I was able to access everything (forum summary / forum topics / topic posts). If anyone has problems or knows anyone that has problems accessing the board without a login name & password please let us know by posting here or sending us an email. Better yet, register! [Smile]
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-19-2002, 01:32 AM:
 
quote:
Windows IE5.0 can 'go back' after a post. Maybe it's a MAC thing.
It's not a Mac problem because it works fine on other Mac browsers. But it is a Mac IE 5 problem. Chimera is the best browser in OS X.

I have NEVER been able to see the thread window in "Post-A-Reply". Well except when I use a PC (I haven't tried it with Chimera yet I don't think). But that's how the web works. Everything is designed to run on PCs and other OS's are ignored. Brilliant. But then again IE 5 generally just sucks anyway, and there is not enough software for me to use OS X full time yet. Not a big deal, really. I can remember what people write.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-19-2002, 07:58 AM:
 
Netscape on the Mac did not have the "no bookmarking" issue when posting a reply though IE alwayd did.

Steve
 
Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 11-19-2002, 10:09 AM:
 
Day by day
in every way
Film-tech gets better and better!
 
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-19-2002, 10:34 AM:
 
I like the new look and features very much. But why is the Joe smily no longer available? [thumbsdown]
 
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 11-19-2002, 11:22 AM:
 
There is one thing I just noticed. The instnt Gaemlins can't be inserted in the middle of a message. No matter where the cursor is, the graemlin goes to the end of your text. At least that is the way it is working on IE on a mac. It's an insignificant thing, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-19-2002, 11:45 AM:
 
I think that would be a problem with IE for the Mac. I guess you'll just have to go back to typing them. [Smile]

Or you could cut and paste...

- Joe not available? [Wink]
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-19-2002, 11:55 AM:
 
Joe
quote:
______________________________________________________
The instant Gaemlins [eyes] can't be inserted in
the middle [eyes] of a message.
______________________________________________________

Is this what [eyes] you can't do.
 
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-19-2002, 12:05 PM:
 
How do you activate the Joe smily? Typing :joe: doesn`t seem to work, I don`t remember how it was done.
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-19-2002, 12:14 PM:
 
The only problem that I've seen so far is that displaying a poster's email address requires Javascript to be enabled, which is a problem for Lynx users or those who disable Javascript to avoid pop-up crap.

Otherwise, everything seems to work fine in Lynx (the main forum page looks different, but works fine), Netscape 4, Mozilla, and Phoenix (a stripped-down variant of Mozilla).
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-19-2002, 12:28 PM:
 
Yeah the new version does a lot of stuff client side, hence the javascript for the post indicators and topic folders. Hopefully it will reduce the server load a little since it can use server side cacheing this way. I'm still looking at ways to use the 'noscript' tags to call for the proper images.

Michael, Joe's graemlin (and many others) aren't yet coded into this version. I just linked to his pic on the server using the [img] tags. [Wink]
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 11-19-2002, 12:37 PM:
 
Am I blind or did the email notification feature for new posts in designated threads go away? I'm not receiving emails any more for new posts in the Movie Quote game, and I don't see any option to select or enable it either. [Confused]
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-19-2002, 12:53 PM:
 
Yeah it's gone for now. I'm actually working on restoring that right now...
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-19-2002, 04:49 PM:
 
Interestingly enough the graemlins and ubb code only inserts at the end of the typing on Windows Opera6 too. It wasn't that way before, so another hack probably got in the way.

Bill Gabel, please use the ubb code tags when quoting. As it turns out (I edited another post of yours as a test), your "fake" quote string of underscores is what is causing your posts to not display in line with everyone else's. [Wink]
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-19-2002, 04:52 PM:
 
I said it before in the beta test and I'll say it again now, but it still looks cluttered without the vertical line dividing the poster's name/picture/location and the body of the post itself. Seems to be in demand. Perhaps there is no way for this version of the UBB to divide that cell? I am used to PHPBB. Now that is a rockin' forum program (and it's free). It can work with databases, etc.

Other than the clickable icons and clickable bold, itallics, etc. what is the super new adavantage to this version?
 
Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 11-19-2002, 07:23 PM:
 
My problem with that vertical dividing line was that no matter how many spaces I put between it and my text, the text would always be left justified practically touching that line. That looked terrible, especially when typing verse, or trying to make columns, as with a spreadsheet.

Now there is a separation of space, which gives the text a better look and greater legibility.

We now have the ability to use the techniques of a word processor, if I can only learn to use the UBB Code [below].

The answer to "What is UBB Code?" is encyclopedic, but I hope to take a few days off to learn to apply it. (As the little girl said to the librarian on returning a book, "This book tells more about penguins than I care to know.")
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-19-2002, 07:25 PM:
 
We have already decided to restore that vertical line.
 
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 11-19-2002, 09:24 PM:
 
Suggestion:

Would it be possible somehow to be able to edit Topic titles? This could ease the problem of having to close threads and reopen new ones due to teaser subjects and whatnot. This could also eliminate problems when searching due to typos in the thread/topic title.

Just curious if this is even possible.
=TMP=
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-19-2002, 09:25 PM:
 
Perhaps the old UBB did this and I don't remember, but is there a convenient way now of entering a web site name without it turning into a link? Saying a literal "www.foo.com" turns it into a (URL)-tagged item. I found that evil things like (URL)&nbsp(/URL)www.foo.com work, but that's more ugly than I'm comfortable with. (I use (FOO) to indicate [FOO] above).

--jhawk
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-19-2002, 09:46 PM:
 
quote:
Would it be possible somehow to be able to edit Topic titles?
This is now possible. The topic starter has the ability to edit the topic title.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-19-2002, 09:49 PM:
 
www.foo.com

Foo!

Nothing else has to be done. Just type it in. If you want to use the ubb code URL tags, you can.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-19-2002, 10:14 PM:
 
quote:
Perhaps the old UBB did this and I don't remember, but is there a convenient way now of entering a web site name without it turning into a link?
I think John is looking for a convenient way to make it inconvenient for everybody else. [Smile]

If you put the address in bold or italics it won't auto-hyperlink.

www.foo.com
http://www.foo.com
www.foo.com
http://www.foo.com
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-19-2002, 10:33 PM:
 
John may have been talking about the hack that turned all of the hyperlink text to say "here". Even going back and editing the text post-posting, it reverted back to a link that just said "here". It made for some odd-looking posts.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-19-2002, 10:55 PM:
 
Daryl hits it on the money. When posting refererences to, say, access-controlled web sites, it seems inappropriate to post them as links.

Yes, using visible markup makes them go away, I was hoping for a way to avoid such visible markup. But it does seem that quotation marks also work, which is maybe sufficient.

Adam, I think you were supposed to not mention that. Brad wanted that as a "feature" and it disappeared with the new version, but now you've reminded him, so we're perhaps doomed to its return? What a shame, too, because it really is a cumbersome thing to work in the word "here" and still provide the same useful information. Maybe people will stop abusing the linking feature in the way Brad disliked...

Of course, we're doomed to forum abuse. Look, there's another case of "Matthew Bailey's edit button mysteriously doesn't work." [thumbsdown]

--jhawk
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-19-2002, 11:06 PM:
 
Oh, I get it now. [Wink] Sites like the NY Times, where I have to provide them with my email address in order to read the article.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-19-2002, 11:12 PM:
 
Yeah, maybe. Though the specific example was in More Sony Shorts where I didn't want to give a link to the Sony exhibitor web site since most people browsing the forum won't have or be eligable for an account, and the URL was no more complicated than simply the domain name.

--jhawk
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-19-2002, 11:37 PM:
 
We're fully aware that the 'here feature' is not currently implemented. Hopefully, now that the javascript URL instant code makes it so easy, people will not post stupidly-long url's that don't display a shortened name. But don't fear, I'm currently working on an even better feature that will sign 'long link offenders' up to all the spam sending sites I can find. [evil]
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-20-2002, 06:43 AM:
 
Don't forget porn sites too Daryl! Offenders need more porn. [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-20-2002, 07:04 AM:
 
Note to members: To update the "New Post" indicators click the Film-Tech Forums logo on the page that lists all the different forums (first page you see after clicking agree).
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-20-2002, 11:37 AM:
 
I think we've brought this one up before: How about "sticky" threads? "Who the HECK are you?" comes to mind.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-20-2002, 09:14 PM:
 
Thanks for getting the "email when there's a new post" working.
Presumably you're aware that the text is "A user has replied to a topic you created," regardless of whether the topic was actually created by you?

--jhawk
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-20-2002, 09:49 PM:
 
John, could you let me know what thread it was that you got the email notification for. Thanks.

Adam, Sticky Topics is on the list of things to do when I get some free time. Maybe next summer. [Smile]
 
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-21-2002, 01:49 PM:
 
One trivial request - any chance that the 'include your profile signature' option could be set to off by default, as it was in the last version? I don't think a signature file is needed routinely - if anyone wants some background on a poster, [s]he can always press the 'who?' button. If I were posting a potentially contentious opinion in a professional context (e.g. '[insert name of product here] is brilliant/crap') then I would want a signature file on the bottom to state who I am and why I am qualified to say this. But in 99 posts out of 100 (especially in 'film yak' posts, which are not about work at all), they just generate extra text to wade through, IMHO.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-22-2002, 06:55 AM:
 
If you don't have a signature (like myself), you don't need to uncheck the box. No harm done either way.
 
Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 11-23-2002, 06:00 AM:
 
Nice improvements Daryl and Brad. [Smile]

Will we ever be able to change our own profile photograph? [Cool]

When I posted in the thread ‘Projector Parts’ it did not go to the top. There are 4 posts in total; two are only recorded in Topic Starter. [Confused]
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 11-23-2002, 08:30 PM:
 
"it did not go to the top"

This has happened to me a couple times. Daryl is aware of it but doesn't know the cause. In any case if you wait ~10 mins it seems to bubble up to the top like it should.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-23-2002, 10:10 PM:
 
What is with the "gong-show" on the new Chat room?

The chat room repeatedly gongs at you. This has been verified on both Mac and PC running various web browsers.

The only solution I have found, thus far, is to turn off the sound (for everything).

Steve
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-23-2002, 10:53 PM:
 
'Will we ever be able to change our own profile photograph?'
Due the complexity of the topic listing and caching code and the fact that any errors in the image source coding will bring down any topic that the member has participated in, it is unlikely that this will happen. You can however, email your photos to Brad.

The forum topic listing issue is a problem with the server-side caching scripts. I just don't have the time to go through that much code right now.

The 'gong-show' is supposed to tell you when someone enters chat. If you 'talk' once it should go away and not gong again until someone else enters. This way you can browse the forums (or whatever else) and be notified when someone new enters chat.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-24-2002, 01:52 AM:
 
Yup, that repeated "gong" is a glitch in the original program code to the chat room. Daryl thinks he may be able to rewrite it once he gets some spare time. However I felt that just letting it do it's thing and having the "hey, someone else is now in the chat room" audible notification work was worth having to hit ENTER once you get in there yourself.

Since Daryl coded in an auto-boot of an "old you" upon reentry, I suppose I could extend the "auto boot after 10 minutes" timer if there is a desire. No more Tooth Fairy. [Razz]
 
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 11-26-2002, 11:27 AM:
 
I don't mean to nit-pick, but I do have one minute complaint. I love the log-in bar(>> Hello, Joe Beres), but I miss the amount of information that would fit in the small window I use on my iMac at work. If ever you feel that it is appropriate and have the time, I would like to see a reduction of some of the space, indicated by the red boxes, near the top of the page.

-

That's just me though. [Big Grin] Everything is working quite well, and the site is greatly improved. Great work!
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-26-2002, 02:48 PM:
 
That's already been noted. Hacking programs like these take a great amount of time and skill. Fortunately Daryl is a super-genius with stuff like this. He is just short on time like many of us.
 
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 11-27-2002, 09:38 AM:
 
quote:
Windows IE5.0 can 'go back' after a post. Maybe it's a MAC thing. I can't really tell, I don't have IE5 on my MAC emulator.
IIRC you can use the "back" button, but you have to double-click it for some reason. Not sure though...I switched to OS X and haven't seen OS 9 in a while.

Joe: in the meantime, you might consider reducing the font size..?

What might we use the "add to buddy list" feature for?

...and what is foo?
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-27-2002, 09:48 AM:
 
Joe, as Brad said, it is definetely on my list of things to do -- it bugs me too!

Unfortunately some idiot decided that I should have all six of my exams in two days time. When I find that person I will... (oops, um) ...thank them for remembering to schedule all my exams this time around (another story). My last exam is on the 10th, I'll probably sleep till the 12th, and then I'll have some time to work on some more code.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-01-2002, 01:59 AM:
 
The search feature seems to've dropped "search by name" in favor of "search by registered member number." This does not appear to be a step forward [Confused] .

--jhawk
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-01-2002, 02:18 AM:
 
Jiggidy JLo (or JHawk),

You are supposed to memorize every registered members' number. [Smile]
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-01-2002, 02:40 AM:
 
Number 3:

Are you the new number two? Who is number 1? (cf. The Prisoner.)

While of course I have every member's number memorized, it's much less exciting to type in the "dreaded 601" than to be able to type in "The Screen Gems Master" and discover that somehow I remembered his title rather than his actual name.

--jhawk
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-01-2002, 02:49 AM:
 
Hmmmmm, I didn't realize it was doing that. I'm sure Daryl will be able to re-script the program in about 20 seconds to fix it though. [Wink]
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-01-2002, 03:51 PM:
 
I noticed that last night too while doing a search for the mighty 601. Sure got a good laugh. Have you noticed that all the crazy people have 600 series membership numbers? (Not all the 600's are crazy, just all the crazy's are 600's). [Smile]

I only have 15 seconds to spare right now... I guess I'll have to change it later.

--1303
 
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 12-01-2002, 07:40 PM:
 
I reckon I'm crazy as well... [Eek!] [Eek!] [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 12-02-2002, 12:38 PM:
 
Just in case you, are looking to drop me an entry for the Joke Forum I can be located by my member number 763. Don't let anyone know...it's a secret. [eyes]
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-03-2002, 01:41 AM:
 
This doesn't have anything to do with the recent forum changes, but I do have a suggestion and would like to hear others' opinions about it (make sure you agree with my opinion).

Signatures should be limited to company reps and special exceptions. I'm not sure what those special exceptions would be, but I'm sure a few could qualify. I just don't like seeing supposedly "funny" quips and whatnot at the end of every single post certain individuals make. They add absolutely nothing to the discussion, and are absolutely worthless... especially after you have seen them a billion times. They do not add personality.

Signatures for company reps like John Pytlak are awesome. They provide actual useful information such as the company he works for, his title and easy contact info, etc. Sigs in this case actually DO add to any post. Thoughts?
 
Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 12-03-2002, 09:32 AM:
 
Joe, I agree with you but do you really read every thing that a film-techer posts. No, half of these members write like millions and millions of words, and they ramble on and on, that have no point. I skim most posts and read the ones that are helpful. I know they want to include the most helpful information possible, but if you exceed 250 words end it.
 
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-03-2002, 10:26 AM:
 
quote:
Signatures for company reps like John Pytlak are awesome. They provide actual useful information such as the company he works for, his title and easy contact info, etc. Sigs in this case actually DO add to any post. Thoughts?
I don't agree. I don't see any need for signature files at all because this bulletin board software has the 'who?' button. If a reader wants to find out who someone works for, their job title and contact information, [s]he can get it by pressing that button.

E-mail based listservs are a different kettle of fish because you have no means of finding out about a contributor unless their post includes a signature file. Becuase of this I make signature files compulsory on a list I moderate (i.e. I will not distribute any posts which don't have them), and insist that they contain at least the following information: full name, institutional affiliation, job title (if applicable) and e-mail address. If members want to include a postal address and 'phone number as well, that's fine.

But on a forum like this, the 'who?' button takes care of that function. I suppose that could leave the issue of whether someone is writing in a professional or a personal capacity in each individual post. But that could be covered by a forum rule to the effect that members are assumed to be writing in a professional capacity unless they explicitly state otherwise.

I'd guess that a lot of signature files have suddenly started appearing in the last few weeks becuase the new forum software defaults to include them, whereas with the previous version you had to select them.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-03-2002, 02:08 PM:
 
The signatures have always been something I have disliked. I find them annoying to read the same old cheezy catch-phrase in the middle of a serious discussion over and over. John Pytlak is of course an excellent example of a great signature and one of the reasons signatures have continued to be allowed. The "who" profile button currently can not support all of the contact data that John chooses to provide. When the time comes that the program can be modified to offer that info in a member's forum (optional for each member, of course), then the signatures will probably be removed, or at least limited to 50 characters or something.

If anyone really wants to see signatures kept after the profiles have been extended, please provide a good reason and I'll entertain it.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-03-2002, 04:52 PM:
 
So Brad,

Do wish that I remove my slogan? Personally, I don't care. It does let everyone know that I'm a changeover kinda guy which is how I'm viewed anyway. There is one friend that I told that all projection problems can be solved by going to changeover operation...thus everytime he had a problem or question...it was a trick to somehow fit the "changeovers somehow fix this sort of problem" into the conversation without actually mentioning it...sometimes it took 15 minutes before he caught on...it was great!

Steve
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-03-2002, 05:06 PM:
 
Yours isn't necessary (everyone knows you are a reel nut), but on the other hand it isn't obnoxious due to it's length. Hence my possible 50 character limitation thought. Another thought of mine was to put people's postings in bold so their signatures would clearly not be part of the discussion at a glance. Of course another solution would be to put the signatures in a smaller type. It's not something I'm too concerned about right now though.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-03-2002, 06:22 PM:
 
Making the signatures appear in a smaller font size sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe restoring the 'company rep. titles' would be a good idea too. A 50 character or one line limit for 'non-company' signatures might also be a possible 'solution'. Most of the company reps with long signatures are good for turning them off when not relavent, like in the Movie Quote Game. Making entire posts appear in bold, though, is probably not a good idea. It's hard to read so much bold. In fact, in addition to the poor sentence structure and formatting of my post, the bold print makes it even harder to read. [Smile]

--------------------------------------
My non-bolded phiggidy-phat signature.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-03-2002, 06:34 PM:
 
Uh, yeah. I don't even WANT to read Daryl's post. All the bold just looks bad. But smaller type would be cool. That way it would be easy to skip over unless someone wanted to read it.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-03-2002, 08:09 PM:
 
Well how about an ALL-CAPS post and bold ? That should look just swell! [Roll Eyes]

Steve
 
Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 12-03-2002, 09:32 PM:
 
I DON'T THINK SO! [Eek!]

WHAT DO YOU THINK? [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-03-2002, 09:45 PM:
 
OK HOW ABOUT ALL CAPS AND ALL BOLD, NOT TO MENTION ALL ITALICS???
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-03-2002, 09:59 PM:
 
HOW ABOUT BIG, BOLD, UNDERLINED,  ITALIC POSTS

with really small and entirely lowercase signatures
 
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 12-03-2002, 11:34 PM:
 
How about the same plain old text, same old boring subject matter with certain lack of knowledge... but no signature? [eyes] [sleep]
 
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 12-04-2002, 12:44 AM:
 
I think we as Americans in this Great Land of Equality and Opportunity should continue to have the Freedom of signatures at the bottom of our posts. When we start regulating who gets to have a signature and who doesn't then, as the Ad Council puts it, America is not America anymore and Freedom Itself is under Attaq. If we don't have signatures at the end, then the terrorists have won. [Roll Eyes]

So yeah. Keep the signatures. No offense to our international members.
=TMP=
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-04-2002, 03:22 AM:
 
How did you do big and small? I thought that could only be done on PHPBB and not UBB. I actually wanted to do the small sig thing in my previous post to see how it would look.

---------------------
[size=9]OK I am testing small size now, using code from PHPBB. Nope, doesn't work.[/size]
 
Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-04-2002, 10:42 AM:
 
The main reason I used my signature often was to provide a clickable link to my movie theatre info site at the end of posts. Recently, I'd been using it with decreasing frequency, until the default was to include the sig. I've seen at least one recent post where the link did not work and some where I edited the post and the description got changed to "here".

The post is a test of current sig behavior. If the URL does not work, I'll stop using the sig.
 
Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-04-2002, 10:50 AM:
 
It appears that the UBB code for the URL was deleted in the last transition of the site software, and just the description remained. Anyway, it's not necessary for that to be at the bottom of my posts, so I'll only include that URL at the bottom of a post if having a link to it is relevant in any way to the post being made.

Let's see what happens if the sig is empty and the "Show Signature" is checked.

(Good -- nothing showed up -- but it is interesting that it affected the display of the sig in the previous post! I always thought the sig got inserted into the post and became part of it.).
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-04-2002, 11:11 AM:
 
Joe, I turned on HTML for my post. I wanted to see how the small text would look.

Evans, signatures do become 'part of the post'. You're signature file probably got 'mucked up' during the upgrade. Some people's signatures were deleted entirely.
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-04-2002, 12:20 PM:
 
Would it be possible to add another field to the "member profile" page? That would make it possible to add the type of information that one would normally add to a .signature (contact info, preference for platters or changeovers, etc.) without it having to be included with every post.
 
Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-04-2002, 12:34 PM:
 
quote:
Evans, signatures do become 'part of the post'. You're signature file probably got 'mucked up' during the upgrade. Some people's signatures were deleted entirely.
Testing to determine the exact behavior of a sig when posting and editing a post......

No, the new signature I just added is now shown in the previous posts above. They can't be "part of the post". (Not a complaint -- just trying to determine exact behavior of the feature) [Smile]

.... however, I just noticed that my old sig is on older posts made a couple days ago in other threads. But, the sig changed in the posts above without me editing those posts. So, only one version of a sig per thread? [Confused]
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-04-2002, 01:04 PM:
 
My bad, I guess that's an 'improvement' for 6.3.x. 6.2.x didn't do that. Your signature 'should' be updated in other threads (if show signature was selected) when those threads are updated by a post/edit or a cache refresh cycle.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-04-2002, 02:29 PM:
 
Be careful when enabling HTML in the forums. Once a looooong time ago Brad forgot to turn off HTML, and I took advantage of it with radio buttons, text boxes, select menus, a little javascript, etc.

The entire thread had to be deleted, and even THAT turned out to be a chore.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-04-2002, 02:45 PM:
 
Actually Mr. Joe, that continued to haunt me up until a few weeks ago. Something in the forum's program wouldn't delete the files properly and every time I went to update threads (when I add new member pics and for searching reasons) it would lock up and I would have to keep restarting it. Fortunately this new version fixed all of that and when I update a member's picture, the entire forum gets it immediately with no hassle. It wasn't a huge ordeal, just an annoyance. And yes that's why html is turned off for most all members.

That 1500 post original joke thread in the Yak forum also wreaked havoc with the server. All is happy now, but when the miscellaneous thread in the Joke-A-Thon forum hits 1500, it will be time to start a new one just in case.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-07-2002, 12:28 AM:
 
So, instead of getting email on threads I didn't start, now I don't seem to be getting email at all on new posts. Definitely getting too many messages was much better than too few...

--jhawk
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-07-2002, 12:58 AM:
 
Uh, what?

Nothing has changed (unless the sendmail daemon died) since email notification was 'sorta' restored. Notifications should be sent out for any old threads (prior to Nov 17) that you were receiving emails for, along with any new threads that you start (and choose to receive notifications for). Currently you can not choose to receive email notifications for threads you reply to. Nor can you choose to stop receiving email notifications for threads you are currently receiving emails for that you did not start.

Oh yeah -- some threads also have issues with only sending notifications out to some members due to a glitch in the way the old software did the email notifications (basically some member numbers are corrupted causing the current script to bail). This is currently being addressed with my 3 spare minutes a day, one day at a time.

If you are experiencing something other than the above you'll have to describe it a little better, 'cause I ain't got a clue what your sayin'. [Smile]
 
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 12-07-2002, 01:01 AM:
 
John,

Maybe you should log in more often and peruse the topics more often? I notice that since the chnage, that's what I've been doing anyway.... altho it is a bit more cumbersome to scroll down and breeze over all the recent topics when you check in on two different pcs.... oh well, I'll live... And I might hit 300 posts tonight...
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-07-2002, 12:20 PM:
 
'dunno, Daryl. It's just a perception thing. It's probably that no one is replying to pre-17 Nov threads anymore, so it just seems less.

BTW, yet another feature request for the long haul...with the Last Post column at the "Film-Tech Forums" page, it would be nice if the Last Post link actually took you to the last post, or at lesat the last page of the thread. I.e. "click on a reference to a post, you should get to that post, not to the dawn of time of that thread."

[ Yeah, I know it's not coming anytime soon. You'd think these InfoPop people would actually put some real effort into their product...]

--jhawk
 
Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 12-08-2002, 08:40 PM:
 
Font issues aside... [Smile] Neither IE6 nor Netscape 7.0 will take me to the Pictures, Reviews, or Tips sections. I don't think Win XP is the issue... any ideas?
 
Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 12-08-2002, 09:46 PM:
 
All these comments about signatures have made me want to try one.
The edit page has a box to check to add sig. from profile. But when I click on my "Who?" I don't see a line on the form for writing a signature. So how is it done?
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-09-2002, 12:50 AM:
 
Click "Profile" at the tippy top of the screen. All the way to the top. Further. See it? Right next to "Search", "FAQ", "Register", "Forum Home", and "Click Here to WIN BIG PRIZES!". Now click "View/Update Profile".

There ya go!
 
Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 12-11-2002, 09:30 PM:
 
Yikes! To think it was there all the time and I missed it?
Thanks Joe!
Gerard
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 01-23-2003, 06:48 PM:
 
If anyone notices certain 'text sequences' that cause the spell check window to just pop up blank and do nothing please reply here.

Thanks!
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 01-25-2003, 02:55 AM:
 
To reply to jhawk's post in another thread...

I still have to write another subroutine to automatically check that box for you after you've done it once.

In the meantime you'll just have to check the box again when you make an edit.
 
Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 01-25-2003, 07:48 AM:
 
The spell check box has come up blank every time I have tried to use it. Including this post.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-25-2003, 03:56 PM:
 
Same for me on spell check. I'll just have to rely on my years and years of spelling training to complete this post.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 01-25-2003, 04:01 PM:
 
Weird. If I try editing both of your posts, the spell check works for me.

Of course it won't even show up in Opera if you have pop-ups disabled.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 01-27-2003, 02:33 AM:
 
Brad: Your chat modifications are hilarious! [Razz]
 
Posted by Matthew Peters (Member # 1495) on 01-27-2003, 07:20 AM:
 
When I try to upload a pic, I get a
quote:
Your login has failed! Please check your username and password and try again
But I was never prompted for them; there wasn’t even a field for it.
I have done it successfully before, any idea why it failed this time?
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 01-27-2003, 12:16 PM:
 
A little version skew happening... this will be fixed shortly. Try again when you see a username and password field above the filename field.
 
Posted by Matthew Peters (Member # 1495) on 01-27-2003, 05:53 PM:
 
Working now, thanks [Smile]

-

[ 01-28-2003, 12:30 AM: Message edited by: Matthew Peters ]
 
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 01-27-2003, 08:38 PM:
 
I just rrealized tonight that on eis able to send a PM to another lister. I alwyas opted for the traditional email, but I did try the PM option tonight. I thought that the email icon had been swapped out for the PM one, but on viewing another listers info, I found that the email icon was still there...
 
Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 01-29-2003, 05:21 AM:
 
if I reload my browser window to check a post I just made it kicks me out to the main page the first time but then every subsequent time it reloads properly???
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 01-29-2003, 05:55 AM:
 
What browser and OS Sean?
 
Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 01-30-2003, 01:47 AM:
 
oh yeah sorry

IE that comes with AOL and Windows ME!
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-06-2003, 11:16 AM:
 
Coolest/Funniest thing now showing on Film-Tech: Steve Guttag's new "changeover" rotating images. BAD changeovers too. Heh. [Cool] [Wink]
 
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-06-2003, 11:32 AM:
 
>>>>>I just rrealized tonight that on eis able to send a PM to another lister. I alwyas opted for the traditional email, but I did try the PM option tonight. I thought that the email icon had been swapped out for the PM one, but on viewing another listers info, I found that the email icon was still there... <<<<<

If your e-mail is up to date it will notify you if you have a PM. Jason, I ent you a reply to a PM you sent me that has not been read yet according to my PM message thingy. [Smile]
 
Posted by Don Bruechert (Member # 1538) on 02-06-2003, 01:21 PM:
 
I didn't read all the posts, so forgive if this is duplicate.

Using IE 6.0 on XP or Netscape 6.0 on XP, or Netscape 4.7x or 7.0 on 98SE when you post it says "sit tight taking you back to <wherever>". This doesn't do anything (gave it at least 5 minutes once) and I have to click on the link to go back to where I was.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-06-2003, 09:06 PM:
 
Sean, I think I have the same problem (once in a while) as you are. Once in a while I get the book marking page after posting (or even trying to open a topic page). I believe this is an issue with the way IE handles cookies on slower connections.

Don, it works that way on purpose -- I disabled auto-redirection to prevent major problems with some browsers. I just forgot to change the wording. In fact, I can't remember where in the code that wording is. If I come across is one day I'll change it. [Smile]
 
Posted by John Moriarty (Member # 1153) on 02-14-2003, 03:49 PM:
 
Although I like the spell checker function (could it be persuaded to use the correct English spellings? [Wink] ) it seems to fail miserably for long posts. The first problem I noticed is that the text area can be bigger than my screen and there are no scroll bars (so I don't get to see the bottom of the window or click on the button to submit the changes, though tab will get you there). The second problem is that it appears to truncate the message if it is too long (at least this is what I think happened).

John
 
Posted by Dennis Atkinson (Member # 345) on 02-14-2003, 05:14 PM:
 
For the past few weeks, I am only seeing "The Weenie Man" photo on his posts. Everyone else is a broken link. It doesn't matter what browser I use. The rest of the changes are great.

Dennis
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-14-2003, 07:15 PM:
 
John, it is not possible for me to change the language used by Spell Check. In fact, I don't even have control over the Spell Check engine. It is actually a really complicated interface to an engine run on www.spellcheck.net. I'll look into the long post issues -- I think they may be limited to 500 characters, I'll see if I can get around it. I'm also aware that there are 'some' remaining issues with posts that have carriage returns in them. Since I never use Spell Check, it might be a while before I get to it.

Dennis, I'll assume that you can also see pics for Joe and Josh, right. Can you see the 'Film-Tech Forums' logo, the 'instant graemlin' images (on the post page), the menu buttons to the left, and how about pictures inserted into members posts?

What browser (including full version number found in the 'About window, usually under the 'Help' menu) and what platform (OS) are you running? Are you running any form of personal firewall, proxy server, corporate LAN, free internet service, dial-up, DSL, etc.? Is this a somewhat recent problem, or has it been an issue since November 17th?

Thanks!
 
Posted by Dennis Atkinson (Member # 345) on 02-15-2003, 06:52 AM:
 
Windows 2000, Netscape 4.7, Opera 6.04, IE 5
and my newest addition ............Norton Personal Firewall.

Everything else is fine.
How can I tweak it?

Dennis
 
Posted by Hugh McCullough (Member # 1542) on 02-15-2003, 07:34 AM:
 
John

quote:
Although I like the spell checker function (could it be persuaded to use the correct English spellings?)
Why do you not compose your answer in your Word Processing Programme, and then use the built in English spell check? You can then copy & paste onto the Forum page form?
 
Posted by John Moriarty (Member # 1153) on 02-15-2003, 11:22 AM:
 
Sorry, I think a you may have taken me more seriously than I intended. If I'm writing a very long post, I tend to use Word to get it checked properly (and allow me to save it until I finish getting it say what I want). My spelling is usually good enough that I don't bother to spell check it, but the convenience of using the spell check button makes it more likely. The 'complaint' was that having written a post (longer than I expected) and pressed spell check, the spell checker was very difficult to use and removed the end of my original text (requiring me to rewrite it).

It is not a big concern really; it's just one of those things that could be really annoying occasionally.

John

(P.S. When I checked this there was only one spelling mistake which would have been obvious if I'd reread it anyway.)
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-15-2003, 03:26 PM:
 
Your post can only be truncated if you press the button in the spell check pop-up window. So if you see that the spell check has truncated part of your post, don't click the botton and just close the window.
 
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 03-01-2003, 10:22 AM:
 
Why is the feature to post replies in the Wated/For Sale forum disabled? I didn't think we really had any problems with people not following the rules there except very occasionally. This prevents people from bumping up a thread for something they still have for sale, or are still looking for without having to re-post it. Will this be "fixed"?

=TMP=
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-01-2003, 10:48 AM:
 
Nope, because it isn't broken. You see, people in general are stupid. (You know this because you work in a theater and have to deal with the stupidest of the stupid who patronize it.) Rather than emailing when there is something that someone wants to buy or has available, they just reply. This accomplishes four things.

#1 Now the whole world knows of the transaction which doesn't concern anyone except the two parties involved. It is nobody's business. I am just providing the service of a free bulletin board.

#2 It wastes bandwidth, which I pay for.

#3 More often than not, the person who made the post never checks back to see if there was any replies. So what did this accomplish???

#4 It prevents a member from *bumping* up the post over and over and over. This really got abused at the first and I got tired of going in and deleting all of the bumps.

The one thing I've learned from running this forum is that people do not read nor pay much attention. (Those of you who DO pay attention know who you are and it is much appreciated.) For example, try to start a "new post" in the FI&TA forum and see what happens. (Please don't actually make a post there if you don't have new film data to archive.) Also, take a look at the registration page and what I've had to do in order to get people to read the damn thing. (Actually most of the "idiot proofing" credit goes to Daryl. THANK YOU!!!)

So no, this will not be changed in the future.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-01-2003, 10:58 AM:
 
If people (smart and dumb alike) just appended to their post that they have sold / bought / whatever the item they were selling / looking for, there wouldn't be any ambiguity over whether something was still available. Same goes for the Help Wanted Forum.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-10-2003, 12:17 PM:
 
You know what a cool new feature for my birthday would be? Sticky Topics! [Wink] [Razz]
 
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 03-10-2003, 01:31 PM:
 
I must say that I really like the new arrow that takes you to the newest post. Nice work! [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-12-2003, 07:48 PM:
 
It looks like we have sticky topics now, too! [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-12-2003, 08:59 PM:
 
Daryl kicks much ass. [Big Grin] [thumbsup] [beer]
 
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 03-12-2003, 09:33 PM:
 
Hey Daryl. I saw that the search by member name is back, but it doesn't seem to be working. My first search yielded the following response:

quote:
The user number you entered either does not exist or does not have any current posts.
» Please use your browser's back button to return.
The second, a search for my own name to see if I was doing something wrong, and it yielded one topic, from September of 2001 that I didn't post to.

I would have sent an email, but I thought I'd just post it to see if anyone else has had the same problem. Thanks.
 
Posted by Rick Long Jr (Member # 541) on 03-12-2003, 09:55 PM:
 
Yup. I tried a search for my name and it came up with four topics in which I have not posted, and none that I have.
Other than that, I must say this is definitely a great site that that just keeps getting better. [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-13-2003, 02:12 AM:
 
Daryl was being lazy so I fixed it for him. It works now. At least for me, which is what matters. I just had to remove the code that wasn't working and replace it with good code. Pretty easy.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-13-2003, 08:06 AM:
 
I knew I shouldn't have wrote it with vi. [Wink]

There's actually a corrupt member record in the database that is throwing off the search by member name. It'll likely be fixed this weekend if I get some spare time.

Hmmm, it always worked for you Joe, since your member number is lower than the corrupt file number. [Wink]
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-27-2003, 12:36 AM:
 
Searching still seems fubared. I can search for "John Hawkinson" and win, but not for "John Pytlak." But JP is numer 331 and I'm 1551 (or thereabouts), so the prior explanation of it losing for higher numbered members doesn't pan out. But searching by member number works ok. dos?

--jhawk
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-01-2003, 07:03 PM:
 
Over in FITA when I said "it's hard to link to URLs with spaces", Darryl responded with "nothing is broken, support for spaces isn't required by HTTP spec. Use %20 instead of spaces.".

I'm quite familar with the HTTP spec. In fact, I put in the URL with %20, and it still came back as a space. Something in UBB is converting %20 to spaces when it should not. I even went so far as to experiment with &#37;, but it didn't seem to help [nor did it seem to hurt, surprisingly...]

--jhawk
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 05-01-2003, 07:22 PM:
 
Well in that case, this software really does suck!
I'll add it to the list of things to fix. Thanks for pointing it out. Still, why people use meta characters when laying out their directory and file structure is beyond me.

As for the problem with search, the original problem was caused by a corrupt record... that was fixed though, so there must be something else. It's probably being caused by the half-assed search engine database that supposedly needs to be rebuilt once in awhile. Since you have to down the forums to rebuild it, it hasn't been done.

In any case, I'll figure out what is causing the search problem and get it fixed too.
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 05-02-2003, 09:31 AM:
 
Daryl and I discussed UBB and meta characters a while back when trying to deal with an URL with parentheses in it. We ended up giving up on the link.
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 07-08-2003, 12:08 AM:
 
Interesting ... my login cookie just reset without me logging out. [Confused] Now I appear to be good for another 2 years minus one day unless I delete it or log out.

(Edit to test glitch)
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-08-2003, 02:55 PM:
 
The cookie problem is related to an issue with the mail server. Currently the domain is receiving so much spam that spam filtering is choking the SMTP process. The problem with this is that the forum software doesn't really fail gracefully when it can't send mail, so it doesn't get around to setting your cookie correctly after you post.

This issue should be resolved in the next week or so.
 
Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 07-08-2003, 03:20 PM:
 
I think you may be forcing some (including yours truly) to post nonsensical stuff just to post 10 a month to see the pictures. Five a month would be better.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-08-2003, 07:49 PM:
 
Bob it isn't the forum like Daryl said. It's these damn spammers that send out thousands of email spam to the domain every day. We are setting up a dedicated email server just to process spam next week.

And no you are not unable to see the pictures, just not the first to see the pictures. Everything becomes public 14 days after it is added to the site.
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-08-2003, 07:57 PM:
 
Umm...Brad...why do you need a dedicated mail server? The old Unix server handled mail and web service quite nicely with plenty of cycles to spare. :razz:
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-08-2003, 08:14 PM:
 
No it didn't. It had the same issues, remember? You just don't like Windows. [evil] [Razz]

I think the trick is to get mail off of the web server. We'll find out real soon.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-09-2003, 03:11 PM:
 
A couple years back I had the same problem at the ISP, while running under NetBSD. There came a point where spam filtering caused to many issues when running on the pop3 server. Sure, most of the time the server wasn't doing anything... just waiting for SpamAssassin.

Anyway, setting up a seperate gateway to filter for spam and scan for virii worked great. Mind you that was under NetBSD... who knows how it'll work under Win32. Probably just as good.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-09-2003, 07:37 PM:
 
I think you should run it under BeOS or NeXt. Or better yet on an Amiga.
 
Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 07-10-2003, 12:11 AM:
 
Joe,

I hope you were joking about using an Amiga. I used to use Amigas quite a bit when I did video work. have you ever heard of VideoToaster 4000? That was a great system for its time. Ive never really seen them used outside of the TV imdustry.
 
Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 07-11-2003, 03:48 AM:
 
I have signed up everyone with an e-mail address registered with Film-Tech for a lifetime subscription to Tail Wagging Offers. Now you can simply tell the people who send other spam to you that you do not need it, & to please stop. This should help the spam problem.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-11-2003, 03:58 AM:
 
Thanks William, I really appreaciate having to pay for my mail server to transfer 40 Tail Wagging Offers each day!

Bob, it appears that you have 142 posts in the last 12 months, which would be nearly 12 a month. You've got nothing to worry about trying to attain 10 posts a month.

The sneak preview section access restrictions were modified based on feedback received from new and old members alike. To be fair to new members that were participating, we believe that the 10 posts per month policy was best. Likewise, we didn't think it was fair that people who haven't posted in well over a year, still had access to the sneak preview section (and there were people like this) solely because they made 50 posts once upon a time.

Sean, I've got an Amiga in my closet, or maybe it's under my bed... in either case, maybe I'll set it up as our virii scanning gateway. [Smile]
 
Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 07-11-2003, 04:12 AM:
 
[Smile] [Big Grin] [Smile] [Wink] [evil] [Big Grin]

Edit to add the above smilies.

Daryl: Who is "we"? Do you have a frog in your pocket?

No one, not even the Grand PooBah, asked me as an old or new member what I thought was right. I say this cuz who the hell knows what makes someone an "old" or "new" member!

I do think that the revised policy is [bs]

Please see my above post as to what the requirements should be....

>>> Phil

[ 07-11-2003, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: Phil Hill ]
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-11-2003, 04:36 AM:
 
Who do you think he was talking about Phil?

And you have no post above. I looked all the way to the top, then for kicks I looked back a few pages. Nothing there.

Next I guess you will be complaining about how we are going to ban everyone with a rhyming first and last name from the sneak preview section just for kicks.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-11-2003, 04:46 AM:
 
My friend has a Video Toaster 4000/Amiga. It does a fantastic job collecting dust in his closet. He says he'll probably just throw it out.
 
Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 07-11-2003, 03:47 PM:
 
hey if your friend will ship it to me ill pay for the shipping.
 
Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 07-11-2003, 04:52 PM:
 
Always the begger.... [evil]
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-11-2003, 11:21 PM:
 
"Film-Tech. Now with resumable downloads." [Smile]
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 10-04-2003, 11:05 PM:
 
Now without new post indicators that get stuck on if a post is made at the top of the hour.
 
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-04-2003, 11:18 PM:
 
I've got a question about the little arrow that appears to the right of topic titles. I know it's supposed to function like a "resume" feature for each thread but sometimes it just takes me to the top of a thread.

I'm wondering about what conditions will cause that feature to malfunction.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 10-04-2003, 11:27 PM:
 
I've never seen that happen.

Are you taken to the top post (can't see the page header) or is the page just displayed normally.

The only time you should be taken to the top post is if it's a new topic since the last time you reset the post indicators. If you aren't resetting the post indicators by clicking on the forum logo twice it won't work.

The feature also requires javascript.
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-05-2003, 12:36 AM:
 
It also doesn't work properly if someone tries to "cheat" the system due to the login procedure.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-05-2003, 01:56 AM:
 
This will usually happen on a thread you haven't been too in a long, long time. It'll put you on the first post of the first page.

Why not have a cookie that just logs last time visited and member information? That way when the user arrives, the forum looks at the cookie and says "The last time they were here was 1 hour and 45 minutes ago". It then makes all posts since then light up those threads. Then, when you click the arrows it takes you directly to the first new post made since the time stored in the cookie. The current Film-Tech cookie tries to take you to the last post you read in any particular thread. Of course the only bug with this would be if you didn't click on a thread during a visit and came back to it a few visits later, you'd only see the new posts since your most recent visit and would have to backtrack a bit.

I find the way UBB currently deals with cookies (and a few other things) far inferior to the mighty vBulletin forums. UBB has run it's course.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 10-05-2003, 02:16 AM:
 
quote:
Why not have a cookie that just logs last time visited and member information? That way when the user arrives, the forum looks at the cookie and says "The last time they were here was 1 hour and 45 minutes ago". It then makes all posts since then light up those threads. Then, when you click the arrows it takes you directly to the first new post made since the time stored in the cookie.
Uh, that's how it works now.

quote:
The current Film-Tech cookie tries to take you to the last post you read in any particular thread.
That's not how it works.

quote:
This will usually happen on a thread you haven't been too in a long, long time. It'll put you on the first post of the first page.
That doesn't make any sense either... I can click on any thread from years ago and it takes me to the last post.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-05-2003, 03:27 AM:
 
Not me. Must be one of those Mac-unfriendly things, as the arrows have not been very reliable. I have stopped using them. Another reason why vBulletin is better. It works with everything. Even a Mac. I know you'll probably want to blame a Mac for this, but the fact is, UBB just kinda sucks nowadays (the "non-classic" is even worse). Everything you want to add seems to need to be "hacked in". VBulletin already includes most of these features. I tell ya, it's nice perusing vBulletin forums when they are set up right (not hard).
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-06-2004, 11:02 PM:
 
You can now use the back button in Safari, so stop complaining. Or better yet, stop using Safari. Use Firefox, Lynx or IE!
 
Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-06-2004, 11:05 PM:
 
Oh, so Mr. Slave, you've finally corrected a software "feature"? Great! [beer]

>>> Phil
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-06-2004, 11:35 PM:
 
[av=n]Yes, Safari is now compatible with this site. I suffered through using Safari in order test it. Works. So now all of you who refuse to use Firefox for some bizzare reason that I cannot comprehend can now use Safari. Though please know that while Safari now works with the site, Safari still sucks. So does the iPod.
 
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-07-2004, 08:55 AM:
 
Don't be such a damned HATER, Joe ! [Mad]
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-07-2004, 10:52 AM:
 
Hmmm...something is up with the forum coding currently online as when I click to make a post it's taking me out to the main forum menu. Same with NN and IE. And with Opera (6.05 anyway) I can't even get to the forums as it's not going past the disclaimer page.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-07-2004, 12:38 PM:
 
When did CODE stop working?

--jhawk
 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-07-2004, 01:27 PM:
 
Did this start up today Steve, or when?
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-07-2004, 01:30 PM:
 
Today is the first I've noticed it. I presumed some modification has taken place with unintended consequences but perhaps not? Could it be something at this end...cache oddity or whatever?

Editing a post takes me back normally.
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-07-2004, 01:58 PM:
 
I am not having any problems with MSIE 6 or Opera 7.23.
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-07-2004, 02:26 PM:
 
I think Steve is just confused.[av=n]

An Manny, Safari just isn't the best available browser, so I choose to hate it. Hate has been proven to solve problems. I also hate OS 10.3 Leopard or whatever it's called. I use it at work and it is way worse than 10.2.8 except for the awesome Expose feature and a few other niceties.
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-07-2004, 07:05 PM:
 
I think Steve is just confused.

Um no. Just unaware of the cause.

Another oddity is that on entering some threads with IE I can't back out, it replots the same page. Can only exit via the forum link name at the top of note. Repeatable with the thread involved at least at the time. No similar glitch with the identical thread on NN. Also it seems like when I go back to the thread page the whole page including graphic elements are being resent.

Might be something at this end. I don't know. But no one has stated if any software changes were made since yesterday.

Still doing it (returning me to main forum page after a post). NN 7.0 in this case. My IE version is 6.02...
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-07-2004, 09:30 PM:
 
Mozilla and Lynx work fine for me.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-07-2004, 09:41 PM:
 
There have been changes, however the following browsers are working for me:

Opera 6.05 crashed like crazy, which doesn't surprise me one bit. It's one of the most unstable browsers I've ever seen.
I'm still sort of foggy on exactly what is happening to you Steve. What's displayed in your address bar when this is happening?
 
Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-08-2004, 03:39 AM:
 
I agree with Steve. This happened to me a few days ago as well. But only lasted about 10 minutes and then all was OK. I use *theeee* best browser ever! IE 6.0.2800...

My addr bar read: "Daryl's a dumbass.com"

>>> Phil
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-08-2004, 03:56 AM:
 
Actually, no. [Smile] A few days ago you got a 403 Forbidden error message. [Razz]
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-08-2004, 07:49 AM:
 
OK, time for another test.

Clicking to post still puts me out to the forum selector page.
That was with MSIE 6.0.2800.1106 running under W98SE. Editing the post proceeds normally.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-08-2004, 08:41 AM:
 
I'm confused. How do you post if you are taken to the forum summary page when you click reply?
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 08-17-2004, 02:07 AM:
 
Now with cachable member uploaded images for the broadband impaired.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 08-28-2004, 07:10 PM:
 
The software will no longer grab the name of someone quoting someone else and stick it in the quote tags for you. It'll actually grab the name of the person who originally said it, like it always should have but didn't.
 
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 08-28-2004, 08:10 PM:
 
quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea
The software will no longer grab the name of someone quoting someone else and stick it in the quote tags for you. It'll actually grab the name of the person who originally said it, like it always should have but didn't.
Like this? [Smile]
 
Posted by Adam Wilbert (Member # 1184) on 08-28-2004, 08:17 PM:
 
no, like this:
quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea
The software will no longer grab the name of someone quoting someone else and stick it in the quote tags for you. It'll actually grab the name of the person who originally said it, like it always should have but didn't.
See, you quoted Daryl directly. I'm quoting you quoting Daryl. Before it would attribute the quote to you, but now it quotes Daryl. See? [Big Grin]

of course, you could always fix that by puting =name in the first quote tag, so that you'd get
quote: that guy from Ontario two posts up
The software will no longer grab the name of someone quoting someone else and stick it in the quote tags for you. It'll actually grab the name of the person who originally said it, like it always should have but didn't.

 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 08-28-2004, 11:52 PM:
 
Also now with AutoQuote, just for Mark.
 
Posted by Stephen Frazza (Member # 2320) on 09-06-2004, 11:04 PM:
 
Using
If you use a & symbol and try to spell check your post it won't show anything after the & symbol in the spell check box.
 
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-06-2004, 11:14 PM:
 
Resolution: Don't use ampersands.

Cause: The third part spell checking service we use has some issues. Although, I may have neglected to actually properly encode the request string. I just did it the way they told me to.
 
Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-07-2004, 01:03 AM:
 
quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Resolution: Don't use ampersands.
And this from a programmer. Things are different now with you C++ whippersnappers & you don't care, but when I was writing in C, there was still the attempt to maintain the ideal of a classless society.
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2