Site Announcements

-->

12th Jun '09 by Administrator

57 comments 17263 reads

This is a place for the Stockopedia Admin team to announce the latest site developments and to receive user comments.

Unlock with Email

Unlock with Google

Already have an account?
Login here

About the Author

Administrator

Premium Member

57 comments

emptyend

22nd Jun '09

In reply to doverbeach (post #17)

I have just spotted the third link in the row - the 'last post date' - which correctly goes to the thread. But is this link needed at all?

As I suggested above, it would be extremely useful if it went to the thread AND at the same time displayed all the new posts as open rather than hidden - then one could see at a one-click glance what was new.

promethean

22nd Jun '09

ok - updated the view by removing the 'author' and putting his/her name as a mouseover on the thread title.

Also now the poster name aligns to the right as requested.

doverbeach

22nd Jun '09

In reply to emptyend (post #15)

ps.....On the "last reply....by" column, the use of the time of the last post as a link to the thread is a good one (and perhaps argues for keeping the time on display) - but it would be more useful if the link opened (all??) the new posts when the link was clicked on, for those of us who use the "hide all" default option.

I am not sure what the "hide all" default option is or where you opt for it :( But if you are suggesting that when you click on the link the thread should open up with the first unread post at the top followed by any other unread posts, then I think that is an excellent idea.

<edit> ah, I expect you mean the Display Comments Fully expended / As a list option? In that case, an improvement would be to add a third choice here - display read comments collapsed and unread ones fully expanded. I think this would be the logical place to make this decision from rather than have two seperate links from the Active Threads page that give you different views.

(Incidentally, what happened to the idea of a collapse all / expand all button when looking at a thread?)

Murakami

22nd Jun '09

In reply to doverbeach (post #20)

Incidentally, what happened to the idea of a collapse all / expand all button when looking at a thread?

Hi, there is one - it's called Show/Hide all (see above)- it's a link, rather than a button.

emptyend

22nd Jun '09

<edit> ah, I expect you mean the Display Comments Fully expanded / As a list option? In that case, an improvement would be to add a third choice here - display read comments collapsed and unread ones fully expanded.

Yup - thats what I meant - without needing to use the "show/hide all" at the top of the column - which is intended to deal with your point here

(Incidentally, what happened to the idea of a collapse all / expand all button when looking at a thread?)

It is much more useful to expand only the unread ones really (when one is normally going back to threads that have been read before), now that we know how many of them to expect to be opened when we go back to a thread that has displayed "+2" or whatever.

doverbeach

22nd Jun '09

In reply to Murakami (post #21)

Hi, there is one - it's called Show/Hide all (see above)- it's a link, rather than a button.

so it is! doh! v small point - weirdly it doesn't underline on mouseover so it doesnt actually feel like a link.

could it be changed to have a third option Show unread/Show all/Hide All ? and for the user to choose between these as their default setting?

promethean

22nd Jun '09

Hmmm... the show unread idea is very appealing, but there are some technical issues around it... how would we tell if a post was 'read' or 'unread'? It would probably require a manual click to notify us if it's actually 'read'... but that would be extremely laborious for each user, and not very simple!

At present, we just take a timestamp of each visit to each thread... on the rendering of the page we could add a flag to each post that has a timestamp more recent than your last visit... that's the easiest way to do it... but obviously as soon as you navigate away those 'unread' tags will disappear. But it's a nice simple solution.

FYI - if you click the green '+x' new post count link it will currently take you directly to the first unread post and open it for you...

doverbeach

22nd Jun '09

In reply to promethean (post #24)

(I may be missing something here.)

Ideally it would be possible to note read / unread by post. But this requires the user to click at post level, which would be more irritating (and technically complicated I am guessing) than to live with the broad brush solution which is:

Assume that when a user visits a thread they have read all the posts up until that time. You are already collecting the timestamp info for this. Then when they next go to the thread, you show expanded all new posts and collapsed all previous posts.

This is your 'nice simple solution' minus the green tags which you don't need if they are shown as expanded.

promethean

22nd Jun '09

So we've already had one nuisance voter called 'sugarkane' who has marked all the posts in this thread with a 'thumbs down' for no apparent reason. The ease of voting (without reading) is very clear, but how can we counteract this? Obviously terminating voting rights is one option.

We are considering adding a vote limit on a daily, time or count based basis. Any of you have any thoughts?

---

db - point taken and I do like it !

djpreston

22nd Jun '09

Ah Sugarkane - well well well. Surprised? Not one bit.

doverbeach

22nd Jun '09

So we've already had one nuisance voter called 'sugarkane' who has marked all the posts in this thread with a 'thumbs down' for no apparent reason. The ease of voting (without reading) is very clear, but how can we counteract this? Obviously terminating voting rights is one option.

We are considering adding a vote limit on a daily, time or count based basis. Any of you have any thoughts?

eek. Some people need to get a life. But apart from that unhelpful thought...

I would suggest that anyone who is consistently voting a lot the same way (voting Thumbs Up may not stand out as immediately offensive but also spoils the who point of the voting system if done indiscriminately) should get a message from admins saying that their voting privilidges will be withdrawn if they do not stop.

If the problem persists, then introduce a voting limit per day and keep it lowish - say 10 - but exempt frequent contributors from it.

promethean

22nd Jun '09

We will be in due course rolling out a feature so that you can view the names of everyone who has voted for and against a comment. There's nothing quite like naming and shaming for keeping people in line!

djpreston

22nd Jun '09

In reply to doverbeach (post #28)

Hi Db

I posted over on TMF to bring it to the attention of the Mods and then PPd it myself. Jon's replay was:

Hi there djpreston,

I am sorry to have to tell you that we have deleted your message - Subject: "Cross Site Spamming", posted on 6/22/2009 12:50:24 PM (see 'Your Message' below).

Whilst I would fully agree that intentionally disrupting a discussion site is not acceptable, I honestly don't think that CDF on on our site is an appropriate place to raise an issue that's affecting another site - even if you think it may be a poster from here.

That said, if we can be of any help in "dissuading" the poster concerned - always assuming it is the same person (their choice of the same username wouldn't seem the best of disguises if they really do have disruptive intent) - then please tell an administrator at Stockopedia to get in touch with me.

Foolish regards

Jon

UK Community

The Motley Fool

My original TMF post was, Cross Site Spamming:

Okay, so I said I wouldnt post again but this does, I feel, need addressing.

So what if some of us have departed for a new site?

What I find is petty and ridiculous is that someone using the tag of Sugarkane has been spamming/disrupting the stockopedia site. That is, in my opinion, just childish and frankly pathetic.

Now maybe it isnt the sugarkane that post on TMF but if it is so then that is a very poor show, especially as she is not an "investment boards" TMFer but more of a "social boards" poster. Just leave us departed to do what we want elsewhere. Dont "stalk" and disrupt.

D

Ive sent Jon's replay off to Prom and suggest that they speak to one another. Jon has seperately said that if it is the same poster then picking the same user name would be pretty "dim". I agree and there is, of course, always the chance that it is merely a coincidence.... hence the need for both mods to speak to one another to check IP addresses etc. I would hope that anyone from any site would disaapprove of such silly spamming behaviour, no matter which site was affected as otherwise you could/would end up with a virtual "war" across cyberspace which is not helpful to anyone.

emptyend

22nd Jun '09

In reply to promethean (post #26)

db's solution here is the simplest way, prom:

Assume that when a user visits a thread they have read all the posts up until that time. You are already collecting the timestamp info for this. Then when they next go to the thread, you show expanded all new posts and collapsed all previous posts.

Re this issue:

So we've already had one nuisance voter called 'sugarkane' who has marked all the posts in this thread with a 'thumbs down' for no apparent reason. The ease of voting (without reading) is very clear, but how can we counteract this? Obviously terminating voting rights is one option.

We are considering adding a vote limit on a daily, time or count based basis. Any of you have any thoughts?

there is something to be said, in itelf, for "naming and shaming". Like djpreston, this particular news comes as no surprise at all to me, having seen previously destructive behaviour from the same source ( I was going to ask who'd been running around giving all the negatives until I saw your comment). I'm not a big fan of voting limits and occasionally used to find that my daily allowance elsewhere was exceeded on days (long ago) when there were lots of particularly good or useful posts! However,...

Re post #28:

I would suggest that anyone who is consistently voting a lot the same way (voting Thumbs Up may not stand out as immediately offensive but also spoils the who point of the voting system if done indiscriminately) should get a message from admins saying that their voting privilidges will be withdrawn if they do not stop.

Broadly speaking, I'd agree with that. It is, of course, a very useful way to help Stockopedia administrators spot which accounts are in fact linked to destructive-minded interlopers from other sites!!!....... :-)

I'd suggest that anyone who awards lots of negative votes in very short time periods (as I dare say happened in this case) or, over longer periods, has a positive/negative balance that departs substantially from the norm (I'd guess the average of most normal posters is to "thumbs up" approximately ten times or so as many posts as they "thumbs down") is merely marking themselves out as someone who has a destructive agenda and thus asking for their posting/reccing/moderating privileges to be curtailed or to have their account terminated.

Personally I'd be inclined to have an extremely low tolerance of distructive behaviour. Five year olds are not allowed to throw food around in adult parties and it seems to me that this site should simply not tolerate such anti-social behaviour.

Re post #30:

Jon has seperately said that if it is the same poster then picking the same user name would be pretty "dim"

Sadly dimness is quite common. One of Jon's colleagues registered here some while ago and made precisely the same mistake. No doubt they are are now lurking in "respectable" anonymity.

emptyend

22nd Jun '09

In reply to promethean (post #29)

We will be in due course rolling out a feature so that you can view the names of everyone who has voted for and against a comment. There's nothing quite like naming and shaming for keeping people in line!

Good idea in theory - though personally I wouldn't let those who are really looking to be destructive (by repeated negative...or positive...voting) get even that far! If you took a zero tolerance line against those intent on distruption then naming probably wouldn't be necessary at all - and I'm not sure that naming wouldn't spark a series of meta discussions asking why someone voted for or against a particular post (which may of course be for a variety of reasons, from the quality of the content to the conclusions being drawn).

Might be better to have a "sin-bin" somewhere, where posters who have been banned or temporarily restricted can be listed? Of course people might use "new" names for disruptive activities on here - but that would be completely without any point if they knew they would simply attract a rapid ban. In general I'd favour temporary bans from which people can rehab themselves if they so wish.

SW10Chap

22nd Jun '09

In reply to emptyend (post #32)

a series of meta discussions asking why someone voted for or against

It's a very fine balance and I think the voting should remain anonymous. Ultimately I think it helps people to express their opinions without feeling that they may 'must' recommend one way or another. In addition, it may cause genuinely-interested lurkers to back away from making their feelings know through the thumbs.

Might be better to have a "sin-bin" somewhere

Although not an habitual user, I've seen this on HotCopper and it looks an interesting idea. Persons suspended are listed with a little explanation as to what their sin was and how long their suspension will last.

SW10

emptyend

22nd Jun '09

In reply to SW10Chap (post #33)

Although not an habitual user, I've seen this on HotCopper and it looks an interesting idea. Persons suspended are listed with a little explanation as to what their sin was and how long their suspension will last.

mmm....never seen that before, despite visiting HC occasionally. Here's the list: http://www.hotcopper.com.au/bannedusers.asp

HC appear to be suspending people at the rate of about one an hour. I'd hope that if a similar approach is followed here then the offences justifying suspension should be repeated and/or gross breaches of the posting rules - with a fair proportion of the suspensions being long term or permanent. I can't see the point of short-term suspensions - but deliberate disruption of the boards would seem to me worthy of a very long ban.

Isaac

22nd Jun '09

The site is very slow. Is it possible to get a faster server?

Murakami

22nd Jun '09

In reply to Isaac (post #35)

Are you using Internet Explorer? We are trying to optimise the site for IE but there are a number of issues so it's taking time. In the interim, we recommend using either Firefox, Safari or Chrome as your browser, if you can. It should be much, much faster that way.

Isaac

22nd Jun '09

Murakami,

Thanks for your prompt response.

I am using one of the browsers you suggested. Sometimes the site crashes and takes a bit of time to reload. I do like the fact that i can rec posts without having to press the back button! Very simple and easy to use.

Also I should take this opportunity to say Thanks for your hard work. I am begining to like this site more and more. It is pleasing to note the ongoing effort from the Site developers to improve and make the site as efficient as possible for users.

Thank you.

Unlock the metrics for all these stocks and more...

Take a free trial

Facebook Twitter Youtube Instagram RSS

This site cannot substitute for professional investment advice or independent factual verification. To use it, you must accept our Terms of Use, Privacy and Disclaimer policies.

Unlock the metrics for all these stocks and more...

Take a free trial

Site Announcements

Unlock the rest of this article with a 14 day trial

About the Author

Administrator

57 comments

Unlock the metrics for all these stocks and more...

Unlock the metrics for all these stocks and more...