ELynah Forum Update

[Beeeej]

I can't speak to Age's ultimate reasons for deactivating it, but I do know that it was being abused to target individual users.

[imafrshmn]

I can't speak to Age's ultimate reasons for deactivating it, but I do know that it was being abused to target individual users.

This is such a lame reason if true.  Facebook has a "Like" button but no "Dislike" because heaven forbid if people are "attacked" or get their feelings hurt online for posting something.  Does ELynah really need to be this way?  Do people really take their ratings personally or seriously?  Golly. It's just an amusement.  We might as well have automatic censoring of foul language.

[Beeeej]

I can't speak to Age's ultimate reasons for deactivating it, but I do know that it was being abused to target individual users.

This is such a lame reason if true.  Facebook has a "Like" button but no "Dislike" because heaven forbid if people are "attacked" or get their feelings hurt online for posting something.  Does ELynah really need to be this way?  Do people really take their ratings personally or seriously?  Golly. It's just an amusement.  We might as well have automatic censoring of foul language.

I don't entirely disagree, but really... which is lamer:  That a petty individual user might vent his disagreement with another individual user by scuttling the second user's rating with flames, or that we'd rather that not happen?

Nobody has to take their rating "seriously" for such a juvenile act to be obnoxious and unwarranted.

[kicksave]

I can't speak to Age's ultimate reasons for deactivating it, but I do know that it was being abused to target individual users.

This is such a lame reason if true.  Facebook has a "Like" button but no "Dislike" because heaven forbid if people are "attacked" or get their feelings hurt online for posting something.  Does ELynah really need to be this way?  Do people really take their ratings personally or seriously?  Golly. It's just an amusement.  We might as well have automatic censoring of foul language.

I don't entirely disagree, but really... which is lamer:  That a petty individual user might vent his disagreement with another individual user by scuttling the second user's rating with flames, or that we'd rather that not happen?

Nobody has to take their rating "seriously" for such a juvenile act to be obnoxious and unwarranted.

Each person got ONE vote either + or -.  If your rating is so important to you then stop making obnoxious, condescending posts and multiple people will not "scuttle your ratings with flames".  Simple as that.

[Beeeej]

I can't speak to Age's ultimate reasons for deactivating it, but I do know that it was being abused to target individual users.

This is such a lame reason if true.  Facebook has a "Like" button but no "Dislike" because heaven forbid if people are "attacked" or get their feelings hurt online for posting something.  Does ELynah really need to be this way?  Do people really take their ratings personally or seriously?  Golly. It's just an amusement.  We might as well have automatic censoring of foul language.

I don't entirely disagree, but really... which is lamer:  That a petty individual user might vent his disagreement with another individual user by scuttling the second user's rating with flames, or that we'd rather that not happen?

Nobody has to take their rating "seriously" for such a juvenile act to be obnoxious and unwarranted.

Each person got ONE vote either + or -.  If your rating is so important to you then stop making obnoxious, condescending posts and multiple people will not "scuttle your ratings with flames".  Simple as that.

Each person got one vote either + or - for every single post on the board made after the ratings were added.  As a result, "multiple people" were not required to scuttle someone's ratings.  Hard to imagine why you'd think otherwise.

Goodness, that might have been obnoxious and condescending.

[David Harding]

I can't speak to Age's ultimate reasons for deactivating it, but I do know that it was being abused to target individual users.

This is such a lame reason if true.  Facebook has a "Like" button but no "Dislike" because heaven forbid if people are "attacked" or get their feelings hurt online for posting something.  Does ELynah really need to be this way?  Do people really take their ratings personally or seriously?  Golly. It's just an amusement.  We might as well have automatic censoring of foul language.

I don't entirely disagree, but really... which is lamer:  That a petty individual user might vent his disagreement with another individual user by scuttling the second user's rating with flames, or that we'd rather that not happen?

Nobody has to take their rating "seriously" for such a juvenile act to be obnoxious and unwarranted.

Each person got ONE vote either + or -.  If your rating is so important to you then stop making obnoxious, condescending posts and multiple people will not "scuttle your ratings with flames".  Simple as that.

Each person got one vote either + or - for every single post on the board made after the ratings were added.  As a result, "multiple people" were not required to scuttle someone's ratings.  Hard to imagine why you'd think otherwise.

Goodness, that might have been obnoxious and condescending.

So, the ability of one person to scuttle another's rating was proportional to the number of the potential scuttlee's postings.  Some might deem that appropriate, but I can't figure out which emoticon to insert here.

[Rosey]

Ok, so where's the hidden thread? I have "1 new" message in the hockey forum, but it doesn't appear anywhere.

[Beeeej]

Ok, so where's the hidden thread? I have "1 new" message in the hockey forum, but it doesn't appear anywhere.

That's a minor bug we've seen before, I think Age said it's related to the database cache.  When I've encountered it, I've had two outcomes:

1) I check the message list, I've read everything already, and so I click "Mark Forum Read" on that particular forum, and the problem is solved.

2) I check the message list, and the "last post" on the top thread is recent and I haven't read it yet (it just doesn't happen to have a little red "1" next to it), so then I read it, and the problem is solved.

[David Harding]

Ok, so where's the hidden thread? I have "1 new" message in the hockey forum, but it doesn't appear anywhere.

That's a minor bug we've seen before, I think Age said it's related to the database cache.  When I've encountered it, I've had two outcomes:

1) I check the message list, I've read everything already, and so I click "Mark Forum Read" on that particular forum, and the problem is solved.

2) I check the message list, and the "last post" on the top thread is recent and I haven't read it yet (it just doesn't happen to have a little red "1" next to it), so then I read it, and the problem is solved.

The bug hit me yesterday, too, I chose option 1.

[nyc94]

The Ivy League has made changes to their site and the URL on the right side of the page is now wrong.  It is now ivyleaguesports.com/sports/mice/index

[CowbellGuy]

The Ivy League has made changes to their site and the URL on the right side of the page is now wrong.  It is now ivyleaguesports.com/sports/mice/index

Thanks. Fixed.

[CowbellGuy]

New Feature!

Tweets will now be embedded directly into your posts. You just need to paste the link to an individual tweet, et voilà:

https://twitter.com/#!/Whougunacollins/status/185910547429068800

If you're not sure how to got to an individual tweet link, click the "Open" link on a tweet, then click "Details"

[CowbellGuy]

Also, I'm sorry but I had to ditch the +1 thing. It was buggy and apparently really inefficient with database calls. It was very noticeably slowing down page loads and putting unnecessary burden on the server.

[ugarte]

Also, I'm sorry but I had to ditch the +1 thing. It was buggy and apparently really inefficient with database calls. It was very noticeably slowing down page loads and putting unnecessary burden on the server.

SUCK IT, TROTSKY!

[Beeeej]

SUCK IT, TROTSKY!

+1