Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 8084

Shown: posts 16 to 40 of 58. Go back in thread:

 

Re: GRC Newsgroups...lockable threads

Posted by bluedog on November 10, 2002, at 23:59:21

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 10, 2002, at 1:51:12

Dr Bob

Heres an example of another feature that has just recently been introduced at GRC Newsgroups
https://grc.com/x/news.exe?cmd=article&group=grc.news&item=350&utag=

I have seen a few examples of threads at pscychobabble where this feature would have been very handy for you


" Folks,

Yesterday I took a few hours to implement a new discussion
management capability that I have had in mind for some time:

Lockable Newsgroup Threads.

As I recently wrote in a reply to Sam Schinke in news.feedback ...

> It is inherently the case that people and egos are involved
> here. But egos are inherently "individual", whereas the needs
> of the entire community are what I, as manager, need to work
> to address and preserve. So when a discussion turns into "the
> thread that wouldn't die", loses its factual value, and becomes
> just about egos -- in other words, when it gets to the point
> where it might as well be taken to eMail since it's no longer in
> the community's interest to host the dialog -- it makes sense for
> me to administratively lock the thread.
>
> Essentially the electronic equivalent of the chairperson of a
> meeting saying "Okay everyone, enough already. Let's move on ..."

The one thread I have locked so far was started one week ago on
Sunday, 11/03, by "bloated elvis" in the news.feedback group.

Its original subject was: "private address space". However if you
reload that thread's root posting, you'll discover that the root
article's subject now reads:

Subject: **LOCKED** private address space

I am able to lock any thread against further posting by editing the
original article's subject line so that it begins with the string
"**LOCKED**". When accepting any new article, the news server now
quickly checks the thread's root article to be sure that the thread
has not been locked. If the thread is locked, the user will receive
a posting error informing them that the thread is locked against
additional posting.

(If you refresh your connection to the server, so that it's new since
last evening, you can see this for yourself by attempting to post to
that thread.)

I do not anticipate using this facility often, since we generally
succeed in regulating ourselves within reason. But, as happened in
that "private address space" thread, individuals and egos sometimes
get quite caught up in points that no longer need making. When they
refuse to take the hint, I believe that locking threads which have
become pointless can be a gentle and useful tool which serves the
community's interests. :)

Onward ...

--
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson, at work on: < nailing down a million loose ends >"

 

Re: GRC Newsgroups

Posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 1:16:43

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups...lockable threads, posted by bluedog on November 10, 2002, at 23:59:21

> 1. My impression is that the download and display times are faster in a newsreader than in a web based message board.

I know it can be slow here, sorry about that. I think I need to change how the server does some things... But that's a separate issue from how posts are displayed...

> 2. In the newsreader format you only need have the heading of the first post in a thread visible leaving more space on the screen to display the threads you are interested in.

That's true, the threads don't come "pre-expanded", you start with just the first post in each thread. But then it's an extra stop to expand each thread you're interested in. And if an unexpanded thread gets interesting, you'd miss it...

> 3. You can have multiple posts opened in separate windows and displayed on the screen side by side at the same time and with ease in reduced size windows.

You can also have web page links open in new resizable windows...

> 4. You can swap between different newsgroups (eg between PB and PSB) without having to scroll to the top or bottom of the screen.

How do you do it there?

> You can set up your newsreader to display the different groups in a separate column down the side

You mean have two groups displayed at the same time? You could do that here using separate windows...

> 5. But I think the real strength of the newsreader system is the way that you compose and send new posts. It is very much like composing emails and you can use the whole screen to view the post that you are composing.
>
> bluedog

I know some people, myself included, would prefer a larger box to enter posts into. Sometimes I just type into Word and copy and paste.

But it might also be possible to let people adjust the size of the box. If I were to make aspects of this interface customizable, should I start there?

----

> I am thinking now and prefernot to reload mail...if it is not mentioned on relies sent to me is there a way to stop email notification of updates. If not, could you post a how to.
>
> ~tony

Each update email should give you a URL for that. For more information, see:

http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/extras.pl

----

> the method is poor.
> Select, download & read. Again, again, ect.
>
> In newsreader format, the process is more like:
> select chuncks of header and body to read, download, then read, read, read

Sorry, "chunks of header and body"?

> Or, flag threads to watch and download headers and bodies as they grow

You mean you can just "leave it on" and have them added in real time? Now *that* would be neat...

> using a newsreader means some processing is offloaded from your server to the user.
>
> oracle

What part of the processing is that?

----

> > when a discussion turns into "the
> > thread that wouldn't die", loses its factual value, and becomes
> > just about egos -- in other words, when it gets to the point
> > where it might as well be taken to eMail since it's no longer in
> > the community's interest to host the dialog -- it makes sense for
> > me to administratively lock the thread.
>
> bluedog

But when is a thread "no longer in the community's interest"? Not everything here is about facts...

Bob

 

Re: GRC Newsgroups » Dr. Bob

Posted by bluedog on November 11, 2002, at 1:52:41

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 1:16:43

>
> > 5. But I think the real strength of the newsreader system is the way that you compose and send new posts. It is very much like composing emails and you can use the whole screen to view the post that you are composing.
> >
> > bluedog
>
> I know some people, myself included, would prefer a larger box to enter posts into. Sometimes I just type into Word and copy and paste.
>
> But it might also be possible to let people adjust the size of the box. If I were to make aspects of this interface customizable, should I start there?
>
> ----
>

In answer to your question. YES!!!!!

If you could only change one thing about Psychobabble of all the points I mentioned, I would choose to change the way that you compose and send posts.

Really, when it comes down to it I can put up with the other issues but the one thing that causes me REAL frustration is the way that you have to post.

Other than the size of the box the other thing that really frustrates me is the way that you can suddenly just lose a post that you've just composed (for example if you accidently forget to put in your password, or if you accidently check the "no message, just post the above subject" box, or if you go back and check up on a previous post in a thread because you need to refer to it for your current post)

I have had posts simply disappear on me for all of the above reasons which is absolutely horrible when you've just composed a lengthy post that you are rather pleased with.

 

Re: GRC Newsgroups » Dr. Bob

Posted by Dinah on November 11, 2002, at 7:42:17

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 1:16:43

> And if an unexpanded thread gets interesting, you'd miss it...
>
Absolutely true, that happens all the time.

> But when is a thread "no longer in the community's interest"? Not everything here is about facts...
>
> Bob

Thanks Dr. Bob. It's great of you to recognize that, plus if you think you have troubles now, just imagine telling people that their discussion has, in your opinion, gone on long enough. :)

In my not so humble opinion, and to my admittedly easily overstimulated brain, the format to read posts here is far more visually pleasing and easier to follow than others I have seen.

Dinah

 

Re: GRC Newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 11, 2002, at 16:12:27

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 1:16:43

> Sorry, "chunks of header and body"?

Sorry, I am still ill and as of late am
no making sense.

You download headers, select the threads you want to read and download them all.

>
> > Or, flag threads to watch and download headers and bodies as they grow
>
> You mean you can just "leave it on" and have them added in real time? Now *that* would be neat...

Yep
>
> > using a newsreader means some processing is offloaded from your server to the user.
> >
> > oracle
>
> What part of the processing is that?

One big get for the headers and bodies vs hundereds of little http gets if viewed by
web.

 

The absolute BEST Internet Bulletin Board..Infopop

Posted by jay on November 11, 2002, at 17:13:07

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 1:16:43

I REALLY wish *somebody* would look at the Infopop "Ultimate Bulletin Board System".(In my post above) It is, hands down, the ABSOLUTE best, most flexible, and very, very AMAZING internet bulletin board available. It's kinda like the 'Porsche' of internet bulletin boards. It just CAN'T be beat..period.

Jay

 

Re: Newsgroups ty for new infolost

Posted by lostsailor on November 11, 2002, at 19:00:42

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 1:16:43

Yes, I just sa the simple text with easy to use link to end email today, though for now I will follow. HHMM, right under my nose and i started all this . ~Tony

 

Re: size of box, newsgroups

Posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 21:00:34

In reply to Re: GRC Newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 11, 2002, at 16:12:27

> > I know some people, myself included, would prefer a larger box to enter posts into. Sometimes I just type into Word and copy and paste.
> >
> > But it might also be possible to let people adjust the size of the box. If I were to make aspects of this interface customizable, should I start there?
>
> In answer to your question. YES!!!!!
>
> Other than the size of the box

Just to be clear, that's the one specific aspect I have in mind...

> the other thing that really frustrates me is the way that you can suddenly just lose a post that you've just composed (for example if you accidently forget to put in your password, or if you accidently check the "no message, just post the above subject" box, or if you go back and check up on a previous post in a thread because you need to refer to it for your current post)
>
> bluedog

You can't just go "back" in those cases?

----

> I am still ill and as of late am no making sense.

Sorry to hear that, hope you feel better soon!

> You download headers, select the threads you want to read and download them all.

OK, got it. Two steps, and you save on the second because you skip some threads.

> > > using a newsreader means some processing is offloaded from your server to the user.
>
> One big get for the headers and bodies vs hundereds of little http gets if viewed by web.

And one big transfer is easier on the server than a hundred little transfers, even if the total amount transferred is the same?

> > > Or, flag threads to watch and download headers and bodies as they grow
> >
> > You mean you can just "leave it on" and have them added in real time? Now *that* would be neat...
>
> Yep

Hmm, well, I guess a web page could be set to refresh itself periodically...

Bob

 

Icons n other stuff

Posted by shar on November 12, 2002, at 10:36:00

In reply to Re: folder/file system..an example » Dr. Bob, posted by jay on November 10, 2002, at 16:29:27


> you could even let people choose from a pre-approved (or personalized..with your approval) icons associated with the user name.

Maybe it's my old, tired eyes, but this is one of the features I find distracting (and that can take a long time to load on my puter) in other places I post. I usually turn off graphics when I go to sites with icons (which can create its own problems because sometimes there are navigation tools that are graphics without tags).

IMHO, plain is good. When the board for Social or Admin comes up, it is an easy to read list of threads in text format, and responding is easy (doesn't have some responses indented and others not, for example, which is often how I get lost), and a new window opens when I click on a post so the original list of threads is always there.

One example of what I do to make it even more simple is to resize my post-reading window to be somewhat smaller than the board's window. So, to get from a post back to the board I just click outside the post-window's frame onto the yellow of the board-window, and (voila!) there I am again.

That sounds complex to me even with a straightforward system.

I guess imo pb isn't fancy, but to me, it is very user friendly, which a lot of sites with more 'features' are not. And, for this particular site, I feel like the user-friendliness is really important (and even moreso for people who are posting in a language other than English, and translating).

Shar

 

Re: to make it even more simple

Posted by Dr. Bob on November 12, 2002, at 17:57:05

In reply to Icons n other stuff, posted by shar on November 12, 2002, at 10:36:00

> One example of what I do to make it even more simple is to resize my post-reading window to be somewhat smaller than the board's window. So, to get from a post back to the board I just click outside the post-window's frame onto the yellow of the board-window, and (voila!) there I am again.

Have you ever tried the frames? For example:

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/babble.html

Bob

 

Re: The absolute BEST Internet Bulletin Board..Infopop » jay

Posted by IsoM on November 12, 2002, at 19:58:14

In reply to The absolute BEST Internet Bulletin Board..Infopop, posted by jay on November 11, 2002, at 17:13:07

Jay, I like the looks of that board but I think the icons, avatars, & the rest of the format may be a little too much for many. I know my mother would rather drive a boring car with automatic transmission than a fancy Porshe with a standard. Many people are like that about the internet. The simpler, the better for most.

By the way, thanks for that link! I now have a simple but fun Red Dwarf game from the sci-fi forum.

 

Re: size of box, newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 12, 2002, at 22:53:43

In reply to Re: size of box, newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 21:00:34

> And one big transfer is easier on the server than a hundred little transfers, even if the total amount transferred is the same?

The server is less concerned with size, that threads (also called processes). 100 pages loaded
is ~ 100 httpd treads started. Me fetching the board via NNTP all at once.

The other advantage of NNTP is it is as old a protocal as any on the web. Every mail reader supports it.

 

Re: size of box, newsgroups » Dr. Bob

Posted by bluedog on November 13, 2002, at 3:57:03

In reply to Re: size of box, newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2002, at 21:00:34

>
> > the other thing that really frustrates me is the way that you can suddenly just lose a post that you've just composed (for example if you accidently forget to put in your password, or if you accidently check the "no message, just post the above subject" box, or if you go back and check up on a previous post in a thread because you need to refer to it for your current post)
> >
> > bluedog
>
> You can't just go "back" in those cases?
>
> ----
>
> Bob

Many times when I attempt to go back it tells me that the page has expired and the post is gone for good.

Is there some way I can avoid this?

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by Dr. Bob on November 13, 2002, at 8:26:42

In reply to Re: size of box, newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 12, 2002, at 22:53:43

> > And one big transfer is easier on the server than a hundred little transfers, even if the total amount transferred is the same?
>
> The server is less concerned with size, that threads (also called processes). 100 pages loaded is ~ 100 httpd treads started. Me fetching the board via NNTP all at once.

Hmm, I know the number of simultaneous server processes is limited. But these 100 wouldn't be simultaneous... And there's also the user side, for them it's one long wait vs. 100 short ones...

> The other advantage of NNTP is it is as old a protocal as any on the web. Every mail reader supports it.

Well, that's the other thing, how many people even have a newsreader anymore?

Bob

 

Re: lose a post

Posted by Dr. Bob on November 13, 2002, at 8:36:43

In reply to Re: size of box, newsgroups » Dr. Bob, posted by bluedog on November 13, 2002, at 3:57:03

> > > the other thing that really frustrates me is the way that you can suddenly just lose a post that you've just composed (for example if you accidently forget to put in your password, or if you accidently check the "no message, just post the above subject" box, or if you go back and check up on a previous post in a thread because you need to refer to it for your current post)
>
> Many times when I attempt to go back it tells me that the page has expired and the post is gone for good.
>
> Is there some way I can avoid this?

Hmm, I don't think those pages are *set* to expire like that... So maybe it has to do with your browser? Does anyone else have any ideas?

Bob

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 10:50:37

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by Dr. Bob on November 13, 2002, at 8:26:42

> > The other advantage of NNTP is it is as old a protocal as any on the web. Every mail reader supports it.
>
> Well, that's the other thing, how many people even have a newsreader anymore?
>
> Bob

Well, if *every mail reader* supports it, I would think most people have a news reader !

Outlook/outlook express & netscape do.


 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by NikkiT2 on November 13, 2002, at 11:18:52

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 10:50:37

I don't use outlook or any other mail system, and I don't use netscape!!! No newsgroup broswer for me..

Personally, I don't like the news group style.. Il ike this site as it is as its easy for me to follow..

Nikki

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 15:37:41

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by NikkiT2 on November 13, 2002, at 11:18:52

> I don't use outlook or any other mail system, and I don't use netscape!!! No newsgroup broswer for me..
>
> Personally, I don't like the news group style.. Il ike this site as it is as its easy for me to follow..
>
> Nikki

Sigh.

 

Re: newsgroups » oracle

Posted by NikkiT2 on November 13, 2002, at 16:41:39

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 15:37:41

Oracle, why the sigh?? I simply stated my preference like you had been.

I have alot of experience on the net and know what i like, and what i don't like. I have left many message boards etc as the format just wasn't what I class as user friendly.

This site, as it is, is very user friendly, and can be used by people who have very little knowledge of computers and the net.

Like i said, just my opinion.

Nikki

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 16:43:23

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by NikkiT2 on November 13, 2002, at 11:18:52

> Personally, I don't like the news group style.. Il ike this site as it is as its easy for me to follow..
>
> Nikki

1) Any browser is a news reader
2) I was not sugesting moving too news group format, rather adding it as an option
3) Nikki, god forbid you learn anything new from the internet

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 17:02:09

In reply to Re: newsgroups » oracle, posted by NikkiT2 on November 13, 2002, at 16:41:39

> Oracle, why the sigh?? I simply stated my preference like you had been.

It has been my experience that any time a good idea is suggested that might mean a slight change
there is a big back lash here. I see this every time a new board is suggested, this despite the new boards doing quite well. To listen to the complaints one would of never thought these boards would do so well.

 

Re: newsgroups » oracle

Posted by Dinah on November 13, 2002, at 17:14:30

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 17:02:09

You think the new boards are doing well? I keep feeling compelled to read the book just so the discussion thread on the book board will be a bit longer. The reunion boards are rarely used, although if they provide a safe place for some of my favorite posters, I withdraw my objections on principle to them. The faith board is so circumscribed that there is little activity on it. I often get the odd idea that those who feel the freest to post on it are the atheists and agnostics, because everyone else is afraid of saying something, well, religious.

I must confess to a fondness for PPB, and think it's a good place to be able to look thru the archives and see the same situations that inevitably come up over and over all in once place.

Even PSB has been awfully slow. The meds board remains thriving.

I have no particular objection to any of the boards, but it wouldn't have occurred to me to describe them as doing "so well".

Ah well, a difference in perception I guess.

As to the visual aesthetics involved with newsgroups vs. Babble, it's not a question of change to me. It's more a question of a rather linearly organized brain that deals more easily with this format. I'm sure that those of you that are more spatially oriented would find the other format appealing.

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 18:54:04

In reply to Re: newsgroups » oracle, posted by Dinah on November 13, 2002, at 17:14:30

The faith board is so circumscribed that there is little activity on it. I often get the odd idea that those who feel the freest to post on it are the atheists and agnostics, because everyone else is afraid of saying something, well, religious.

Well, one person has not problems posting about his religion.

I do think it was a cop out on Dr Bob to offer that board. The whole religion issue is a can o worms. Creating a board just the please one person and deal with a problem, I think, is just creating another.

Or to look at it another way, Bob bends over backwards if someone is not well liked and the rest feel short changed.

 

Re: Another difference in perspective. (nm) » oracle

Posted by Dinah on November 13, 2002, at 19:51:55

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 18:54:04

 

Re: newsgroups

Posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 22:30:28

In reply to Re: newsgroups, posted by oracle on November 13, 2002, at 18:54:04

I often get the odd idea that those who feel the freest to post on it are the atheists and agnostics, because everyone else is afraid of saying something, well, religious.


Huh ? ASAICT as long as one's god does not call us all fools, everyone elses ability to "saying something religious" is not prohibited.
Diana, I am really suprized you made that statement.

Perhaps it is the first time " atheists and agnostics" get to speak up and their beliefs are held equal to the religious peoples.



Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.