|
|
Post by Kyra84 on May 30, 2012 19:47:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by hu4601 on May 30, 2012 20:16:02 GMT -5
Agree with Kelly. I find new on top much easier to access.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by njr on Jun 1, 2012 14:04:14 GMT -5
Valerie, how does one set up a continuing PM with a group of people? I sent a PM to 11 people and when they reply, it only goes to me, not all 12.
|
|
|
|
Post by ADMIN on Jun 1, 2012 14:29:13 GMT -5
Valerie, how does one set up a continuing PM with a group of people? I sent a PM to 11 people and when they reply, it only goes to me, not all 12. Probably because each of them replied only to you. Just as you sent your PM to multiple members, they must respond to multiple members, by listing the member names in the "TO:" section of the message.
(for multiple recipients type in "username1, username2, username3")PMs here don't seem to create a little mini-board area as they did at the old site. It seems to function more like an internal email. I haven't received a multiple PM yet, so I don't know what the recipient sees. You may have to include the list of screen names in the BODY of the message so everyone will know who's included. |
|
|
|
Post by njr on Jun 1, 2012 15:21:57 GMT -5
Valerie, how does one set up a continuing PM with a group of people? I sent a PM to 11 people and when they reply, it only goes to me, not all 12. Probably because each of them replied only to you. Just as you sent your PM to multiple members, they must respond to multiple members, by listing the member names in the "TO:" section of the message.
(for multiple recipients type in "username1, username2, username3")PMs here don't seem to create a little mini-board area as they did at the old site. It seems to function more like an internal email. I haven't received a multiple PM yet, so I don't know what the recipient sees. You may have to include the list of screen names in the BODY of the message so everyone will know who's included. I figured out (sort of) how to do it, but it will not be as easy as the old board. Each person must make sure they reply to the other people and not just me (as the creator of the PM) each time they want to post something to all of us. One a person types in all the names (in the "To:" box) once, they will show up each time they create a PM and all they have to do is select that group of people. |
|
|
|
Post by njr on Jun 2, 2012 12:45:50 GMT -5
Valerie, Do you have the ability to combine threads? Like when 2 identical threads are started (e.g. Alfie Boe) can you combine them into one?
|
|
|
|
Post by ADMIN on Jun 2, 2012 14:03:42 GMT -5
Yes. No worries. Done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Aug 11, 2012 14:58:29 GMT -5
Posting order. If I'm in the minority, please disregard, but I find that the order of the posts requiring an extra step then moving backward is very awkward. I'd much prefer the new posts be on Page 1 and so on. Checking the link for 50 most recent posts is great. Thanks for listening  The "default" setting for all the boards is the way you see them now. I *think* I can reverse them, so that the most recent post will be on top. Do you have a preference? |
|
|
|
Post by ADMIN on Aug 13, 2012 14:20:39 GMT -5
I find that the order of the posts requiring an extra step then moving backward is very awkward. I'd much prefer the new posts be on Page 1 and so on. It doesn't matter to me. Actually, this Board is so "new" I don't think it matters much at all... BUT - it may make a substantial difference eventually. Do you remember the Red Ball/Photo thread? Would you want to click through that whole thing to get to the most recent post??? :o I'll set up a poll here and see what the majority thinks is best/easiest. The poll is at the top of this thread, and this thread only. Questions, Comments, Suggestionsozalots.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=9&page=1 |
|
|
|
Post by njr on Aug 13, 2012 16:47:59 GMT -5
Please Please keep it the way it is! This is how it was before, wasn't it? All you have to do is look for topics posted "yesterday" or "today" (assuming you visit here daily) and you can easily find where you left off. If you don't visit daily, keep a log of when you were last on.
|
|
|
|
Post by foxie on Aug 13, 2012 19:45:08 GMT -5
no no no want to see the last stuff first!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Aug 13, 2012 22:48:42 GMT -5
Thanks ADMIN! Majority rules sounds good to me. Just seems logical to have the newest first, but that's just my opinion. Yes, I clearly remember the Red Ball thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by foxie on Aug 14, 2012 6:32:46 GMT -5
:oI said this wrong I want the newest first!!!! :-/
|
|
|
|
Post by ADMIN on Aug 14, 2012 10:58:45 GMT -5
Hello, foxie ...and did you vote "wrong"?
A couple of people have asked me what the difference would be. I don't know what to say, other than the obvious. Right now posts on every thread are viewed chronologically. Page One contains the initial entry made by the person who started the thread and successive replies proceed to later pages. You need to find the LAST page of the thread to read the most recent posts. If I "reverse" the order, it will be the other way around. "Today's" posts will show up on Page One and the older posts will be farther down the line.
This would NOT affect the "50 most recent posts" - which many people seem to check regularly as a default "catch up" method. This will only affect the order you see when you access a thread directly.
|
|
|
|
Post by njr on Aug 14, 2012 16:39:08 GMT -5
If it gets switched so that the most recent post is first, then you will have to backtrack and read the posts in reverse order, which, imo, is ridiculous. >  Come on people, who is for keeping it the way it is? (which is the way every forum I've ever seen does it) |
|
|
|
Post by foxie on Aug 14, 2012 17:44:09 GMT -5
Well I really would like the most recent ones first. On the old forum it really showed the most recent first u had to go back pages to see old stuff I don't think is as easy on thisone
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire on Aug 14, 2012 20:05:23 GMT -5
I like it the way it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by ocjackie on Aug 15, 2012 9:44:19 GMT -5
Me too!! |
|
|
|
Post by njr on Aug 15, 2012 10:49:22 GMT -5
More people need to vote to keep it the way it is. The vote has been 5 to 4 for days now!
|
|
|
|
Post by nevaeh777 on Aug 15, 2012 16:59:49 GMT -5
Thanks ADMIN! Majority rules sounds good to me. Just seems logical to have the newest first, but that's just my opinion Huston, we have a problem. Looks like majority rules is not working out LOL. We have a tie!!! Not sure how many more are going to vote here??? Maybe the best thing is to wait until the end of this week and see if any more votes come in and then decide. If no one else votes then we'll just take it that all the others who didn't vote are fine with whatever way it is. I have to admit, I was one that voted to just keep it the way it is, but...if we still have a tie breaker at the end of the week why don't we at least "try" the reverse order (where the most recent posts are on the first page instead of the last). We could try this for a few weeks and see how it feels. We've already had it in this order for a few months so let's "test drive" the reverse and then in a month or so discuss/or do another vote after everyone has tried both ways. This way we're being fair to both sides and getting a better feel of things on the board and what works best for everyone. Just a suggestion. What do you think?  |
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Aug 15, 2012 18:40:46 GMT -5
I like the traditional regular chronological order, oldest posts first and most recent posts last.
Ellen
|
|
|
|
Post by njr on Aug 20, 2012 9:20:02 GMT -5
Leave it like it is--no "test drive" for reverse order! (and Ellen broke the tie anyway) Thanks! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by foxie on Oct 8, 2012 7:08:39 GMT -5
ok val how do we put on pictures looks like everyone else can
|
|
|
|
Post by ADMIN on Oct 8, 2012 13:08:16 GMT -5
ok val how do we put on pictures looks like everyone else can Foxie, I'm not sure what kind of problem you're having. Maybe if you ask a more specific question I could give you a better answer. Are you trying to post a photo you have on your computer, or share something you saw online? You cannot post a photo from your computer until it is uploaded and accessible on the Internet - usually through a photo sharing/storage site like PhotoBucket. You need to open a FREE account and upload your pictures to your personal album on the website. (Instructions there are pretty simple. If you need more help with that, let me know.) To post a photo in your message here, go to the second row of icons (just above the smiley faces) and click the *picture* icon  (fourth from the left). (img)(/img) Will appear in the Message box on your screen in [brackets] not (parentheses). Copy the URL of your photo and place it between the ![]() tags. (img) URL FOR PHOTO GOES HERE(/img) If you see a photo on another website and would like to share it here, right click directly ON the picture and select "Copy Image Location" - paste that between the ![]() tags and the photo will be shared here as well. Please remember that this method does not give you any control over the photo. If it is a news site and they "wipe" their gallery each week, the photo will disappear here as soon as they delete it from their website. (For a more succinct version, see post #20 here:) ozalots.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=9&page=2 |
|
|
|
Post by ADMIN on Oct 8, 2012 21:02:28 GMT -5
I'm not particularly keen on emoticons in general, but I think the selection here is limited and rather boring. We had a couple of cute ones on the old Board and I'd like to liven up our options a bit. The problems is, it looks like I can't simply add more, but I can delete the ones we have and replace them with something else. Here's the default list (you see them whenever you post a message) Smiley Wink  Chessy (has been changed to)  Grin ;D Angry (has been changed to) > Sad Shocked (has been changed to) :o Cool (has been changed to) 8-) Huh  Roll Eyes Tongue (has been changed to) :P Embarrassed (has been changed to) :-[ Lips Sealed (has been changed to)  Undecided (has been changed to) :-/ Kiss (has been changed to) :-* Cry (has been changed to) :'( I'm thinking it would be nice to have a "Happy Dance" and maybe a "Group Hug" or something else a bit more "emotive" than the ones we've got.       There are scads of these things available. I'm open to suggestions. Just remember that I need to delete one of the originals to add something new. P.S. The variety is endless...   |
|
Come on people, who is for keeping it the way it is? (which is the way every forum I've ever seen does it) 
