Contacting Admin

[John Duncan]

Crocodile:
JohnDuncan:Similarly, the rich text behaviour for those of you who have it enabled (it's not default - I myself prefer the non-formatted version so type formatting in by hand) is not perfectcrocodile:I haven't altered anything since signing up. Wouldn't know where to look to enable/disable RTF as there's no Control Panel?

Never did get an answer....

Sorry, just checked your details and you have rich text enabled. Do you still have issues?

 

[Andrew Everard]

In the meantime, and until we get the abuse link fixed, or at least manage to convince someone that it's imperative that it is fixed, please contact us here if you have any abuse, etc., to report.

 

[Crocodile]

JohnDuncan:Sorry, just checked your details and you have rich text enabled. Do you still have issues?Formatting generally is a bit ropey.

You said that RTF was off by default & as I replied, I have never (knowingly) enabled it. How do I get rid of it?

 

[John Duncan]

Crocodile:
JohnDuncan:Sorry, just checked your details and you have rich text enabled. Do you still have issues?Formatting generally is a bit ropey.

You said that RTF was off by default & as I replied, I have never (knowingly) enabled it. How do I get rid of it?

Aha, got you now. OK, I have turned it off for you, tell me whether that's better for you.

 

[Crocodile]

Let's see:

bold

underline



www.whathifi.com

Well carriage returns are now ignored & code for entering a clickable URL doesn't seem to work.
URLs aren't automatically hyperlinked. Any progress with Haymarket choosing some more refined software?

Oh, & clicking on "last reply" in a thread doesn't actually take you to the last reply, just the last page but then that always seems to have been the case.

 

[professorhat]

Use <a href="link">Text for Link</a> for hyperlinks.

ÿ

 

[John Duncan]

Except that doesn't work now he has the rich text editor turned on, I don't think.

We don't have this issue in Firefox (the URL thing). Bear with me while I check that.....

 

[John Duncan]

Right. This is with Firefox 3.0.10, but am presuming the same goes for .0.8:

In order to insert a link, type the text first, select it, and click on the link button. In the top text box on that form which you see, enter the hyperlink you want to link to. Make sure you include the "http://" text, otherwise the link is corrupted.

Note that this only works if you have the rich text editor set on your profile, which only we can do for you (which is why not everybody has it, though am happy to accommodate requests for such as and when I can). Tada...

As for "more refined forum software", if only t'were that simple, my work here would be done...

 

[Crocodile]

I'm now on Firefox 3.0.10.

OK, seems as though CRs work in the post but not in the preview.

I'm completely confused now John. My original comment on formatting was regarding double line spacing & a spurious space being inserted upon CR. You blamed that on RTF which you said I must have enabled since it wasn't default. I replied that I hadn't enabled or changed anything.

When prompted, you then confirmed that I had RTF enabled.

You then said that you'd turned it off at which point all formatting options disappeared.

Then in response to ProfessorHat, you say it's on.

Whatever it's at now, can you please return it to default.

I don't know if there's a setting in this software but one of the problems with inserting a link as per your "Tada" is that is isn't underlined. This together with the only slightly different font colour means that it's far from obvious to newbies that the thing is clickable. I recently tried adding an underline to the text for the link manually & the code was disregarded.

I think someone in Haymarket with responsibility for the forum software in use needs to wake up & have a look around at the competition. Either that or switch to green text on a black background for that truly authentic 1980s Bulletin Board look to match the functionality!

This isn't meant to be denigrating anyone's efforts as I'm sure you're hamstrung by the software but as I've alluded to before, this forum has something of the feel of a shareware project cobbled together by a first time programmer.

I'm sure it's not the intention but I'm getting a bad vibe from this forum as to what it's intentions are. With so many requested features being dismissed as "not a priority", I kind of get a sense of "if you want those features, ****** off & use another forum". That may be OK if you're a virtual monopoly like Ebay but I can think of half a dozen alternative other forums that do offer these features. I also don't think you're doing yourselves any favours by blocking links to other forums. Especially when they don't block you - yet.

Sorry for the rant but it's honestly meant to be constructive.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Your rant is very far from the truth. We would love to offer many of the facilities users have asked for, but at the moment budgetary constraints and limited resources in our digital team mean we are unable to do so.

It's a frustration both we on the editorial team and John and his colleagues on the Digital Media team share.

 

[John Duncan]

Crocodile:I think someone in Haymarket with responsibility for the forum software in use needs to wake up & have a look around at the competition. Either that or switch to green text on a black background for that truly authentic 1980s Bulletin Board look to match the functionality!

That'll be me then. As I alluded to earlier, if it were as simple as dropping in another piece of forum software, we'd do it. However, I have about 28 web sites in my portfolio, and the group as a whole has many more, not all of which use the same forum software. Ideally, my aim would be to change that so that we're all on the same software and all on the same version (which is not currently the case), which requires a bit more planning (and money) than simply 'waking up and having a look around at the competition' - of which, I can assure you, I have done more than my fair share.

Apologies for the confusion over the state of your rich text. Just to be clear (as I said above), only we can set your formatting options, and I've now set it to be Rich Text. Do let me know that that's what you're asking for - my advice for entering links is as above. As for underlining, opinion is divided on whether links should be underlined, but if not underlining is good enough for the BBC, it's good enough for me.

Lastly - as a forum regular of 8,000+ posts before I started working here, I think it's fair to say that I'd like the user experience on here to be as good as it possibly can be, and now that it's my professional responsibility to do so, I'll do my utmost to make sure that that's the case. But I've only been here a couple of months, cut me some slack, hm?

 

[The_Lhc]

JohnDuncan:I'll do my utmost to make sure that that's the case. But I've only been here a couple of months, cut me some slack, hm?

And Duncan pulls out a classic Gordon Brown defence! Tha's good technique is that...

 

[John Duncan]

the_lhc:
JohnDuncan:I'll do my utmost to make sure that that's the case. But I've only been here a couple of months, cut me some slack, hm?

And Duncan pulls out a classic Gordon Brown defence! Tha's good technique is that...

The expenses here are rubbish though....

 

[Andy Clough]

In defense of John, he's doing what he can. But as Andrew pointed out, we're all frustrated by the shortcomings of the Forums and would love to improve the functionality.

But there's a recession on, our budgets are stretched and as the Editor I have to decide what gets spent where. I'd love to be able to upgrade Community Server, the system that runs the Forums, but in reality that won't happen this year.

Not ideal, I know, but believe me we share the frustration. It's most certainly not a case of "we don't care".