-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
(Reasonable) Features you'd like to see implemented on RailUK Forums
- Thread starter Farigiraf
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 24,738
On a railway forum that could be quite a lot, considering much of it is under political control.
We do have a General Discussion section.
The railways being under political control isn't the same thing as Politics. I mean threads that start off as discussion of the Titfield Thunderbolt but devolve into political rants.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes but the subject of this thread is "features you'd like to see implemented". I (me) would like to see a separate politics forum.
If railway discussions become off topic and/or overly political, please report the first such post where this becomes a problem. Including any relevant information in your post, such as details of whether the issue affects any following posts or if there is an existing thread they could be moved to or a new thread title, can also be useful.
Thanks, will do.
I posted on this thread and and it didn't auto-merge. Think it was just after 2 weeks.
Help! Someone using my address for vehicle ownership?
In writing. Be clear and reasonable. Including setting out your expectations that this must now stop. And set out the reasonable charges you will levy for time, post, phone calls and letters, and claiming for any other costs incurred, should you have to take further action due to their failure...
www.railforums.co.uk
Some latitude on speculative posts where the posts are directly related to the subject being discussed.
Ie leave until the conversation dies down before moving to speculative posts section.
The problem is that what is speculative is a bit subjective and a matter can validly discuss both speculative and non speculative material and splitting it into another subforum makes that impossible.
Ie leave until the conversation dies down before moving to speculative posts section.
The problem is that what is speculative is a bit subjective and a matter can validly discuss both speculative and non speculative material and splitting it into another subforum makes that impossible.
I appreciate some people want speculative posts to be mixed in with non speculative discussions; others prefer to be able to obtain updates without having to wonder if the posts are speculative. We will never have universal agreement and can never please everyone as there are different views on this.
However you will just have to accept our stance on this, as we didn't just implement this, we did check with people first and more people prefer them to be kept separate than not.
Edit: does anyone else have any feature requests specifically?
Last edited:
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 24,738
I've some sympathy with the mods on this - the longer you leave it, the more difficult it is to separate things.
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
A way of undoing the "mark all as read" if you accidentally double click on the forum header, which results in everything instantly being marked read...
Especially annoying as I have an intermittently over-sensitive mouse button...
It's purely down to Xenforo; I see the problem has been raised at least once (probably many times) before:
Move "Mark all forums read" link
This is minor, and I might be the only person who feels this way, but I thought I'd give it a shot. Can you move the "Mark all forums read" link that's in the navigation to the right - ideally the rightmost link in the navigation. Being a dummy, I almost slipped and clicked the link just now...
xenforo.com
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
It's these bits ( highlighted in yellow ) I'm having the issue... not the "mark all" link or the semaphore symbols... If I'm clicking the header and the mouse chooses that moment to go into "over-sensitive" mode, that's every thread in that section marked as read...It's purely down to Xenforo; I see the problem has been raised at least once (probably many times) before:
Move "Mark all forums read" link
This is minor, and I might be the only person who feels this way, but I thought I'd give it a shot. Can you move the "Mark all forums read" link that's in the navigation to the right - ideally the rightmost link in the navigation. Being a dummy, I almost slipped and clicked the link just now...
Farigiraf
Member
This. Just double clicking on the words marks everything read and I lose where I was
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 24,738
You learn something new every day!
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
I can’t offhand find an example but I know this to be true having experienced it. There are examples on the pinned electrification resources thread in Infrastructure
If it helps, I think that's how the old version of the double-post-prevention-system used to work. My understanding is that since then, the forum has migrated to new software, though the styling has stayed mostly the same.
Forgive me, but is this not obvious? If the posts aren't merged, a large number of repeated posts builds up by the same user if they can't be bothered to do three extra clicks each time to cut and paste their reply into the edit. A large number of repeated posts by the same person one after another disrupts the flow of the thread.
Techniquest
Veteran Member
Ashley Hill
Established Member
I posted a question on the history thread regarding driving test trains. There were no immediate answers so my post keeps falling lower down the list so is essentially “lost”. Have tried adding to it to get it up to the top again so it gets noticed but it auto merges and stays where it is.
Last edited:
Preventing 'bumping' (see below) is part of the purpose.
What is Bumping? Meaning and Definition
Discover what bumping means in HR, how it works, and its effects on employees and organizations.
www.qandle.com
Sad Sprinter
Established Member
Hahaha - glad to see someone reading my posts!
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Does that mean that if someone posts a totally legitimate post which automerges because the same person posted the previous post, the thread won't reappear in the "new posts" because the system automatically assumes it is bumping?Preventing 'bumping' (see below) is part of the purpose.
What is Bumping? Meaning and Definition
Discover what bumping means in HR, how it works, and its effects on employees and organizations.
I'm not sure about new posts (someone else probably will) but i can confirm that anyone who is subscribed to the thread will receive an alert, if the automerge occured since they last checked it, which is a good feature .
edwin_m
Veteran Member
But that means they will be notified of a bump, when everyone else won't be aware of a legitimate post?
bib
Member
A 'request to re-open thread' button for closed threads
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
But that raises the question, why is it bad practice? Just saying 'bad practice' without giving an underlying reason doesn't really tell us anything useful. It's not obvious to me that there's any problem per se with double posting: On the contrary, double posting seems to be quite natural and logical if a person wants to make two different posts. And for my part, if someone else is making two completely unrelated points, I would much prefer to see them in two different adjacent posts: Makes it much easier for me to mentally separate the sub-threads.
My suspicion (only a suspicion - I may be wrong) is that the real problem that the common presumption against double posting is trying to avoid is one person hogging a thread by posting endless pages of their own opinions - too much for anyone else to be interested in reading. If my suspicion is correct, then auto-merging posts is unlikely to help at all with that problem.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
If there was a small proportion of people who hate auto-merge and a small proportion of people who love it, then I'd be inclined to agree. But I haven't noticed anyone posting to say the like auto-merge (other than that you and other staff members have posted about why you've done it)
If a small group of people strongly dislike X and everyone else really doesn't care either way, then that would suggest to me that it's better not to have X.
(EDIT: Interestingly, this very post has been auto-merged and I think that's an example of automerge working well and appropriately because my two replies here are strongly linked. But I certainly recall other times when automerge has merged posts of mine that I feel really should be kept separate).
Last edited:
Double posting is bad practice for a number of reasons.
Firstly, it clogs up the thread; only 30 posts are presented per page, and as a thread gets longer, the number of people reading subsequent pages and posts gets fewer. So for instance if I reply immediately after, multiple times, then that will take up excess page space, meaning the viewpoints made by later posters become less visible.
Secondly, double posting can disrupt the flow of a discussion, making it difficult for others to follow. Editing your original post keeps the conversation coherent and reduces clutter.
Thirdly, there are some people out there who get satisfaction from having a high post count, and indeed some people, particularly those who are new members, may consider someone with a high post count to be more reputable or trustworthy in their advice. Allowing people to make double posts artificially inflates their post counts.
Editing is an efficient way to update your contributions to a discussion, as it keeps all your comments in one place rather than scattering them across multiple posts.
The forum allows you to access the screen to type a reply with a single click on the “reply” button. Many people, particularly those on mobile phones or tablets, find this easier than using the multi quote tool. If people want to reply to multiple posts, they would have to edit the post, which would then involve copying and pasting the quote BBCode which can be a bit tricky.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Firstly, it clogs up the thread; only 30 posts are presented per page, and as a thread gets longer, the number of people reading subsequent pages and posts gets fewer. So for instance if I reply immediately after, multiple times, then that will take up excess page space, meaning the viewpoints made by later posters become less visible.
Secondly, double posting can disrupt the flow of a discussion, making it difficult for others to follow. Editing your original post keeps the conversation coherent and reduces clutter.
Thirdly, there are some people out there who get satisfaction from having a high post count, and indeed some people, particularly those who are new members, may consider someone with a high post count to be more reputable or trustworthy in their advice. Allowing people to make double posts artificially inflates their post counts.
Editing is an efficient way to update your contributions to a discussion, as it keeps all your comments in one place rather than scattering them across multiple posts.
The forum allows you to access the screen to type a reply with a single click on the “reply” button. Many people, particularly those on mobile phones or tablets, find this easier than using the multi quote tool. If people want to reply to multiple posts, they would have to edit the post, which would then involve copying and pasting the quote BBCode which can be a bit tricky.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I’m struggling to think of an example where someone would need to make two different posts in the same thread, unless they are quoting someone else; in which case the quote box acts as a natural break. This post is a perfect example of that.
- Status