RSS feeds seem to be broken. Only getting news from 2001...
9
What Does Everyone Think About The New Site Layout?
Started by cowsarenotevil, Jan 09 2011 10:21 AM
487 replies to this topic
Sponsor:
#402 Members - Reputation: 604
Posted 15 January 2011 - 10:55 AM
That seems a bit inconsistent. It's unprofessional because it's web 2.0? Or because it's similar to FaceBook? Neither of those are unprofessional, or uncomplimentary things to say about GD.What's with all that Web 2.0 crap? Facebook, Twitter, etc. That feels kinda unprofessional. It feels like "we added everything which wasn't on a tree in three seconds".
#403 Members - Reputation: 2408
Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:20 AM
I don't really understand why people are so bothered by the social networking icons - they are not exactly intrusive and it's probably quite nice for some people to be able to share to Facebook - none of my FB friends are computer types so they'd just find it weird if I did but I'm sure not everyone is the same.
I'd personally far rather see member reputation under their Group, rather than number of posts and date they joined - far more useful information to me. I'm in the camp of wanting down-rates back but I don't think this is going to happen and it isn't worth worrying about.
(Unless anyone wants to join me in a movement to create our own system via the signatures? We just add our reputations to our signatures with rate up and down links that email us and all promise to be super-honest about it. What could go wrong?
)
I'm loving the new journal (journal, damnit, not blog) features and think journals look a lot more professional now and are far easier to use. It's great that these are now free as I'm sure it will lead to far, far more interesting content than dross.
I didn't like the WYSIWYG editor so big deal - I disabled it. The new tags are far easier to use than the old weird mix of tags and HTML that we had in the old site. Multiquote is great as well.
I was going to moan about the lack of links in posts to journals, showcase etc like we had but then just created a signature instead. Sorted.
I'd personally far rather see member reputation under their Group, rather than number of posts and date they joined - far more useful information to me. I'm in the camp of wanting down-rates back but I don't think this is going to happen and it isn't worth worrying about.
(Unless anyone wants to join me in a movement to create our own system via the signatures? We just add our reputations to our signatures with rate up and down links that email us and all promise to be super-honest about it. What could go wrong?
)I'm loving the new journal (journal, damnit, not blog) features and think journals look a lot more professional now and are far easier to use. It's great that these are now free as I'm sure it will lead to far, far more interesting content than dross.
I didn't like the WYSIWYG editor so big deal - I disabled it. The new tags are far easier to use than the old weird mix of tags and HTML that we had in the old site. Multiquote is great as well.
I was going to moan about the lack of links in posts to journals, showcase etc like we had but then just created a signature instead. Sorted.
#404 Senior Staff - Reputation: 2793
Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:59 AM
RSS feeds are a known issue.
Member rep will be included in post information.
I can access your gallery images and journal via the buttons under your avatar.
Again, everyone remember that it hasn't even been a week yet, we're still load balancing the servers, and there's a lot of work yet to be done. Looks like the servers are running pretty well right now...
Member rep will be included in post information.
I can access your gallery images and journal via the buttons under your avatar.
Again, everyone remember that it hasn't even been a week yet, we're still load balancing the servers, and there's a lot of work yet to be done. Looks like the servers are running pretty well right now...
#408 Members - Reputation: 2408
Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:42 PM
Posting history feature has gone? (I mean when all the posts can be seen not just a few)
As SiCrane said, this is currently buggy and it is taking a very long time for new posts in threads to start appearing in your content.
Gaiiden is aware of this issue and it will resolve once the site settles down.
#411 Senior Staff - Reputation: 2793
Posted 16 January 2011 - 08:34 AM
That seems to be a whole 'nuther issue affecting old accounts. Mine does it too, but people from more recent years (I haven't discovered how far back) seem to be okay, if a bit delayed.About 10 years in my case. The most recent post it's showing for me is from 2001.
The good news is that, unless I missed something overnight, Mike has informed us that the DB server has logged around 40 hours uptime so far. We may be able to start increasing load soon.
#412 Members - Reputation: 632
Posted 17 January 2011 - 08:42 AM
Found a few bugs in articles.
1. The comment section isn't displaying comments for me. It's showing that there are comments there, but says "No Comments to Display."
2. This might be article specific, but all the code snippets are broken and look horrendously ugly.
1. The comment section isn't displaying comments for me. It's showing that there are comments there, but says "No Comments to Display."
2. This might be article specific, but all the code snippets are broken and look horrendously ugly.
#417 Banned - Reputation: 356
Posted 17 January 2011 - 07:28 PM
About 10 years in my case. The most recent post it's showing for me is from 2001.
As SiCrane said, this is currently buggy and it is taking a very long time for new posts in threads to start appearing in your content.
http://www.break.com/usercontent/2010/1/back-to-the-future-fail-1665126
I like the Walrus best.
#418 Senior Staff - Reputation: 2793
Posted 17 January 2011 - 10:11 PM
Just in case you haven't seen it yet, new journal update regarding site development. Highly recommend everyone read to be up to date with all that's going on.
#420 Senior Staff - Reputation: 2793
Posted 19 January 2011 - 05:27 PM
Actually most people haven't realized yet that you can change the post time of your journal entry similar to other blogs like Wordpress. When you edit, click on the "Publish Immediately (Change)" link to set a new date and time. So yes, you can schedule posts.Journals should post by publish time, not draft-saved time, methinks. Otherwise newly published posts get buried. Unless I'm misunderstanding the system. It's not so bad, though, since there's always cut-n-paste.
But yea, the draft time posting issue has been noted in our Suggestions area of the Issues Tracker. I agree it would make sense to set the date/time to when the entry is actually published
