[kurtlives]

In some forums you can move your cursor over a topic tittle and a little box will pop up showing the first 30 words or whatever of the topic. I think this idea would be good for GTU. Then you wouldn't have to go into the actually topic to see how stupid it really is . It would give you a better idea of what you are getting yourself into. I don't see many downsides to this idea.

So what do you think?

[kkatarn327]

Great idea, but I would think that the Flash work needed to install that feature would be quite a load, and it would also slow down those users who are on dial-up (and it looks like one of the big things Rob wants to do with this site is to make it as dial-up accessible as possibe.

[nealmac]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Can you give us a link to a forum that uses this type of thing? Just to get a feel for it?

[kurtlives]

Link

That is the only one I could think of off the top of my head but I know there are a few others.

This post has been edited by kurtlives: 22 August 2007 - 09:31 AM

[nealmac]

Pretty good. Although being able to read a bit more than that would be nicer. Maybe two lines of text.

[igorski]

Great idea, but I would think that the Flash work needed to install that feature would be quite a load, and it would also slow down those users who are on dial-up (and it looks like one of the big things Rob wants to do with this site is to make it as dial-up accessible as possibe.

Actually you could do it with just Javascript/AJAX (for a pop-up 'DIV' window idea, not the small single line in the posted link). The script can be cached (and in fairness would be pretty small to begin with) and the database load is minimal for just selecting a few lines from the threads first post.

However, is it really that important an addition ? Rob's got plenty to do.

Is this the wrong time to ask wether quotes can include the original post number (and a link to said page, post position) so one can quickly find the other unquoted posts that caused the convo to take a certain direction ?

[kurtlives]

Would it be hard to get for GTU?

[nealmac]

Great idea, but I would think that the Flash work needed to install that feature would be quite a load, and it would also slow down those users who are on dial-up (and it looks like one of the big things Rob wants to do with this site is to make it as dial-up accessible as possibe.

Actually you could do it with just Javascript/AJAX (for a pop-up 'DIV' window idea, not the small single line in the posted link). The script can be cached (and in fairness would be pretty small to begin with) and the database load is minimal for just selecting a few lines from the threads first post.

However, is it really that important an addition ? Rob's got plenty to do.

Is this the wrong time to ask wether quotes can include the original post number (and a link to said page, post position) so one can quickly find the other unquoted posts that caused the convo to take a certain direction ?

Well, not really, but it certainly be useful. Nothing more annoying than opening a thread that looks like it may be interesting, but actually isn't.

Well ok, there are more annoying things, but not many.

[jenniferdurst]

What happens if the first line is stupid and then there are a





couple of lines of spaces between the actual useful and then you're ######ed




anyway.

[nealmac]

True. But if it's an easy enough system to implement, then why not do it? It won't do any harm.

[kurtlives]

Exactly

Why do I never see Rob posting anymore. Maybe he is a watcher

[kkatarn327]

Well I think, if you're gonna do something like that, either do it right or don't do it at all. Have enough text from the post in the box for someone to actually get a good idea of the thread, not just the first line or something; because then that would just get annoying.

Well, not really, but it certainly be useful. Nothing more annoying than opening a thread that looks like it may be interesting, but actually isn't.

Well ok, there are more annoying things, but not many.

It takes you, what, a grand total of two seconds to open a post, read it, then decide if it's interesting or not? Unless you're on 56k, then I apologize.

But the thing is, I hope we really aren't that lazy as to get soooooo disappointed by an "interesting looking thread" that isn't. You HAVE to read the whole post to make an accurate decision anyways.

And like Jen said, what if it is an actual interesting post, one which you could have helped out with, but because the first part didn't seem interesting, you didn't open? You would be up all night wondering, 'what if I opened it...?' (ok well not really but you get the point)

I dunno, I digress. I guess I'm getting too passionate on the subject