new posts

Lathai · Post by **Lathai** » July 20th, 2006, 8:15 pm

It seems that when one logs out all the new posts are changed so they are no longer marked as new. I don't know about for other people, but sometimes I have to go before I can read all the posts marked new that I meant to and it is somewhat aggravating to come back and search out the posts that were replied too by watching the date or whatever.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it would be nice if their was an option not to reset the "new" marker for posts when one logs out (unless this is already implemented and I'm just ignorant

)

Post by **zookeeper** » July 20th, 2006, 8:21 pm

It's sometimes annoying, when you have to read all the new posts before quitting, to prevent interesting posts or threads getting lost...at least a slightly longer delay would be nice, so you'd only "lose" new posts you haven't read if you have logged in and seen them but not read in the past 12 hours, for example.

Lathai · Post by **Lathai** » July 21st, 2006, 3:34 pm

Yeah, that would work too.

<X> Pillager · Post by **<X> Pillager** » July 21st, 2006, 5:26 pm

Not really for my purposes, actually. I think it would be best if posts you havent' read are NEVER marked read until either 1. you've viewed the thread or 2. you click the 'mark all topics read' button. Just speaking from how I use the forums, I never find the auto-marking of threads as read useful...

Part of this might come from the fact that zookeeper's proposal doesn't really make sense to me. Is the 12 hours realtime, or based on how much time you spend logged in?

Lathai · Post by **Lathai** » July 24th, 2006, 7:00 pm

Probably realtime.

Like you log on and read some of the posts marked new and not some of the others and then 12 hours later (realtime) those posts which were marked new are marked read.

This might be tough from a coding point which is why I suggested only marking posts "read" if one actually reads them or hits the "mark all topics read button" (or whatever it is).

Anyhow, it would be useful for me if I didn't have to look at the dates to find posts I hadn't read yet.

<X> Pillager · Post by **<X> Pillager** » July 25th, 2006, 6:19 am

Why should there be a 12 hour delay? What if I don't have time to get on in the next 12 hours - does that mean I've suddenly read the topics? Or do topics go out of date after 12 hours? I think not.

Lathai · Post by **Lathai** » July 25th, 2006, 4:35 pm

No, not that all topics become read after 12 hours but any topics that were marked unread when you last logged in that you didn't read become read.

Example: topics a, b, and c are new topics when you log in. You read a but b and c don't look interesting (or something) so you don't read them. So you then log off. Say, 6 hours later you log back in. Topics b and c are still marked new (it hasn't been 12 hours) you decided to read b but not c. Now you log off and log back on 13 hours later. Topic c is marked as read but all of the posts that were posted during the 13 hours you were offline are marked as new because you haven't seen them yet.

Basically the 12 hours applies only too posts you have already seen in the forum (just not read).

As I said, this might be too complicated for coding, which is why I proposed that the read/unread status of posts not change when you log off in the first place.

Dacyn · Post by **Dacyn** » July 26th, 2006, 12:23 am

So if you are interrupted reading posts in the evening, you basically have no chance to look at them (unless you can get up early next morning)? 24 hours would be better...

Lathai · Post by **Lathai** » July 26th, 2006, 12:41 am

well, yes, 12 hours is somewhat arbitrary.

<X> Pillager · Post by **<X> Pillager** » July 26th, 2006, 6:48 pm

24 hours would still suck. What if I don't have a chance to get on at all the next day? I try to avoid getting on the computer on sundays - does that mean that if I don't have time to read a thread on saturday, I never want to read it?

Again - there is absolutely no reason, IMHO, to automatically mark any posts.

Lathai · Post by **Lathai** » July 26th, 2006, 7:31 pm

All right then, back to my original idea not to automatically mark posts as "read" when someone logs off.

Post by **turin** » July 26th, 2006, 7:38 pm

Lathai wrote:All right then, back to my original idea not to automatically mark posts as "read" when someone logs off.

Which I agree with.

Post by **allefant** » July 26th, 2006, 8:23 pm

Incidentally, this just happened to me before as well. Someone posted a forum link in #wesnoth-de, I clicked it, read the post, and closed firefox. Then when I came back minutes later for my daily scanning of the forums, it would only show posts as unread since I had followed that IRC link - so now there's no more way to know if I missed anything interesting.

Well, in short, I'd also vote for never marking posts as read automatically.