PDA

View Full Version : Comments on new sticky "** All about the Thanks feature **"



popch
February 20th, 2008, 09:14 PM
Thank you for placing a sticky about the thanking feature on top of this forum.

Two minor suggestions:

I seem to observe that in many cases a post is 'thanked' as a signal of approval or agreement rather than as a sign for a post which was actually useful to the person doing the thanks. The sticky does not address this particular kind of misuse, if it is such.

In at least one thread some users apparently were unable to find the thingy to click on in order to issue thanks. I then produced a very crude and ugly picture showing clearly where it is. It earned me several thanks all at once. The suggestion is to show a picture, but perhaps one which is a bit less ugly than mine, please.

As always: should we post a sticky atop the forum admonishing users to read the stickies?

LaRoza
February 20th, 2008, 09:36 PM
I don't see that as particularly bad. It seems to be a good way to show approval and agreement instead of posting. I don't set policy though, obviously.

There is an image now. What do you think?

We have considered making a sticky that reminds people to read the stickies, but we got reach the maximum recursion depth and had a segfault. We avoid discussions like that now.

popch
February 20th, 2008, 10:08 PM
I don't see that as particularly bad. It seems to be a good way to show approval and agreement instead of posting.

I don't, either. However, as I am a bit literal minded from time to time, I thought I'd mention the ambiquity.


There is an image now. What do you think?

Better, with two additional suggestions:

The two boxes (one blue, one reddish) have very narrow borders and are very discreetly done. They might be somewhat hard to detect for persons with color perception challenges (between 5 and 15 percent of white males).

I usually use for such purposes elements with shapes, curves or textures which form a very clear and striking contrast to their environment. A lightly arcing arrow with a length of 5em or more might be more obvious and easier to spot.

LaRoza
February 20th, 2008, 10:24 PM
Better, with two additional suggestions:

The two boxes (one blue, one reddish) have very narrow borders and are very discreetly done. They might be somewhat hard to detect for persons with color perception challenges (between 5 and 15 percent of white males).

I usually use for such purposes elements with shapes, curves or textures which form a very clear and striking contrast to their environment. A lightly arcing arrow with a length of 5em or more might be more obvious and easier to spot.

I always try to be discreet, but that is a good point.

My artistic abilities are less make Xkcd look like the the ceiling of the Cappella Sistina, so I did my best.

"curves or textures" is beyond my abilities...

I hope my alteration is suitable, if not, will someone make another one? I also gave written instructions.

I really didn't want to take an image myself, as the Edit box would show up (I'm a moderator...). But I don't know if the thanks feature is shown for non members...

popch
February 20th, 2008, 10:56 PM
I hope my alteration is suitable, (...). But I don't know if the thanks feature is shown for non members...

It's perfectly suitable for the purpose, thank you very much.

All features on the screen shot are exactly as I see them myself, only that I do not see the thanking button on my own post.

Now that it is not needed any more, I have found the one I had made for that purpose. It took me all of about five minutes to produce and it shows it. Speaking of the Sixtina. It's the sixth post in this thread: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=657117

Forrest Gumpp
February 20th, 2008, 11:26 PM
FYI the 'thanks' button is not displaying in this thread until I log in, as I think was mentioned in one of the many recent 'thanks' thread as being a feature of this feature (and for which advice the informing poster was duly and immediately mutiply thanked with pressings of the said button by other grateful posters).

Could it be that part of the reason for the 'site blindness' of many members (and perhaps even a greater proportion of mere visitors) is that for much of the time that they are viewing posts to the Forum they are logged out, and just don't get to see this button?

Am I right in thinking that on the Ubuntu Forums there is no cookie either optionally or automatically placed upon a forum member's computer to automatically indicate their connection to the site?

popch
February 20th, 2008, 11:29 PM
Am I right in thinking that on the Ubuntu Forums there is no cookie either optionally or automatically placed upon a forum member's computer to automatically indicate their connection to the site?

I have both of the computers I normally use to access this forum instructed to automatically log me in whenever I connect to the forum. The forum then shows in several places that I am logged in as popch.

In the computer I use for testing I do not automatically log in. The forum then faithfully displays that I am not logged in.

LaRoza
February 20th, 2008, 11:30 PM
All features on the screen shot are exactly as I see them myself, only that I do not see the thanking button on my own post.



No, I see the Edit button on all posts, as I can edit all the posts you can see.

LaRoza
February 20th, 2008, 11:31 PM
FYI the 'thanks' button is not displaying in this thread until I log in, as I think was mentioned in one of the many recent 'thanks' thread as being a feature of this feature (and for which advice the informing poster was duly and immediately mutiply thanked with pressings of the said button by other grateful posters).

Could it be that part of the reason for the 'site blindness' of many members (and perhaps even a greater proportion of mere visitors) is that for much of the time that they are viewing posts to the Forum they are logged out, and just don't get to see this button?

Am I right in thinking that on the Ubuntu Forums there is no cookie either optionally or automatically placed upon a forum member's computer to automatically indicate their connection to the site?

You can check it when you log in to remember you.

pmasiar
February 21st, 2008, 01:04 AM
Sticky is great but we all know too well that nobody read stickies. It might prevent questions, but will not improve use of this feature.

I suggested in some post before that one way to improve "discoverability" is to have thank icon next to number of thanks in user's header. So user will build mental model associating thank with icon, so the "thank" button next to quote will be more noticeable.

Best software design is when usability is obvious == user's mental model matches actual functionality as designed by programmer, and there is no need to read FAQs.

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 01:31 AM
Best software design is when usability is obvious == user's mental model matches actual functionality as designed by programmer, and there is no need to read FAQs.

I disagree, the best software design is being usable and efficient, and not obvious in its use.

Anyone who makes a redundant thread on the Thanks feature will be tased, so it should catch on fast.

(See posts 25 and up)

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=665558&page=3

(Note: I and others in that thread were not moderators at the time)

p_quarles
February 21st, 2008, 01:36 AM
Anyone who makes a redundant thread on the Thanks feature will be tased, so it should catch on fast.)
Though there are more efficient ways.
http://xkcd.com/293/

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 01:58 AM
Though there are more efficient ways.
http://xkcd.com/293/

That feature hasn't been implemented yet.

popch
February 21st, 2008, 08:36 AM
Sticky is great but we all know too well that nobody read stickies. It might prevent questions, but will not improve use of this feature.

I suggested in some post before that one way to improve "discoverability" is to have thank icon next to number of thanks in user's header. So user will build mental model associating thank with icon, so the "thank" button next to quote will be more noticeable.

Best software design is when usability is obvious == user's mental model matches actual functionality as designed by programmer, and there is no need to read FAQs.

We all know that many users do not like to read the fine manual. The corollary is, of course, that many users will fail to discover functions even when they are utterly discoverable. We already have commented on the fact that there are quite a few threads on the topic of 'thanking' even when the very act of starting such a thread shows a page with a plain message telling that there already are such threads.

However, this does not give us the right to grumble about users not reading the fine manual when there is, in fact, no manual, fine or otherwise.

Hence, LaRoza is right in publishing a brief introduction into the function in question, and I thank her again for doing so.

This thread is called 'Comments on new sticky'. It is about the sticky. It is not about implementing a function in the vBulletin software as used in this here forum. It is not about GUI development doctrine and theory.

Forrest Gumpp
February 21st, 2008, 12:52 PM
"It is not about implementing a function in the vBulletin software as used in this here forum".
How dare you, Sir, claim not to have English as your first language, when you display such utter mastery of it! "this here forum"! Indeed, and right on!

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 02:09 PM
We have already gotten our first thread on the Thanks feature, after the sticky was made.

It addresses an issue that is in bold in the sticky.

I think I am going to cry...

popch
February 21st, 2008, 03:33 PM
We have already gotten our first thread on the Thanks feature, after the sticky was made.

It addresses an issue that is in bold in the sticky.

I think I am going to cry...

Hush, dear. Here, have a tissue.

popch
February 21st, 2008, 03:37 PM
How dare you, Sir, claim not to have English as your first language

It's true, and it's not my fault. However, English seems to be a very very simple language. Even small children can speak fluently in English.

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 03:47 PM
Hush, dear. Here, have a tissue.

**Blows nose** Thanks **hands tissue back**

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 03:49 PM
It's true, and it's not my fault. However, English seems to be a very very simple language. Even small children can speak fluently in English.

Do you speak english often?

(I disagree english is simple, at least when compared to german.)

popch
February 21st, 2008, 03:56 PM
Do you speak english often?

(I disagree english is simple, at least when compared to german.)

I do not speak english at all. Well, I seem to spend about two weeks every few years in Merry Old England, where they then pretend that they understand me.

I read a lot, mostly science fiction, all in english. I must own about a thousand books (English ones, that is). Right now, I am re-reading the lot, and I am now at 'S' (Silverberg).

popch
February 21st, 2008, 06:14 PM
**Blows nose** Thanks **hands tissue back**

**pockets tissue**

Back on topic: Tasing would work after the fact only, making it a somewhat forensic or post mortem tool. Perhaps we should re-introduce the text attribut 'flashing', making the stickies flash on and off?

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 06:17 PM
**pockets tissue**

Back on topic: Tasing would work after the fact only, making it a somewhat forensic or post mortem tool. Perhaps we should re-introduce the text attribut 'flashing', making the stickies flash on and off?

<blink> is the non standard tag for that.

Also, you can use the the CSS property "text-decoration:blink".

Shall we have them synchonised? Or having a flashing array of stickies?

Maybe we can make them "play" music as well.

popch
February 21st, 2008, 06:25 PM
<blink> is the non standard tag for that.

Also, you can use the the CSS property "text-decoration:blink".

Shall we have them synchonised? Or having a flashing array of stickies?

Maybe we can make them "play" music as well.

Yes, blinking was what I had in mind. Can we have them out of phase with a different frequency for each line? As an alternative, we could use an animated arrow (like a barber pole) pointing at each sticky.

No matter what we think of, someone will find a way to ignore the stickies.

Perhaps we should label them as 'secret' and 'do not read on any account' and hide them poorly?

p_quarles
February 21st, 2008, 06:30 PM
A beta test.

pmasiar
February 21st, 2008, 06:41 PM
Hence,
Your grasp of English is good. You obviously read a lot :-)


LaRoza is right in publishing a brief introduction into the function in question, and I thank her again for doing so.

Me too.

But I always think how to improve what I have, get next 5%.


This thread is called 'Comments on new sticky'. It is about the sticky. It is not about implementing a function in the vBulletin software as used in this here forum. It is not about GUI development doctrine and theory.

I agree.

But it is not a new function: it is a (IMHO quite trivial) change in template for post header.

LaRoza
February 21st, 2008, 06:47 PM
But it is not a new function: it is a (IMHO quite trivial) change in template for post header.

Technically trivial, most likely. I do not have control over that, only the admins do.

I know that many of them are very busy (one has a child with chickpox...) so I suspect that the feature is the last thing on their minds.

When the feature is fully implemented, I am sure they will look at the other issues. They do listen.

Forrest Gumpp
February 28th, 2008, 02:08 AM
At the risk of being accused of necroposty, I offer the following observations.

As I post the number of views recorded of the Sticky **All about the Thanks feature** stands at 113.

The number of views of this thread, "Comments on new sticky **All about the Thanks feature**", stands at 245.

Less than half the number of persons prepared to view this latter thread can possibly have read the Sticky!



This surely calls for a sterner response from the Forum Administration. Carrot and stick, Award and Infraction (with, of course, the option of any accompanying Indulgence:)) even were they to be implemented, may not be enough. Just exactly what this sterner response could be, by way of suggestion, is presently taxing my mind. However, some thought could be given in the interim to the formation of an enforcement group within the UF administration. Such a group could, perhaps, come to be known as the Stern Gang.



I do trust that, in making these observations with respect to numbers of views of pages, only views by members of the Ubuntu Forums are recorded. If views by guests are recorded, then it has to be assumed that the ignoring of the stickies by Forum members is even worse, pro rata, than it presently provably is.

p_quarles
February 28th, 2008, 02:12 AM
Less than half the number of persons prepared to view this latter thread can possibly have read the Sticky!
Hmm. Maybe this thread should be symlinked to the sticky.

FuturePilot
February 28th, 2008, 05:46 AM
ln -s http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=702675 http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=702596
:lolflag:

popch
February 28th, 2008, 07:26 AM
Less than half the number of persons prepared to view this latter thread can possibly have read the Sticky!
This surely calls for a sterner response from the Forum Administration. Carrot and stick, .

I can confirm from my own observation that the stickies tend to be somewhat less visible than the body of a forum. I do not know why this is so. At times, it takes me several visits to notice that the stickies have been changed while I see the changes in the body at first glance.

I do not think that sterner responses by the Administration would be really helpful. We already have half of the 'carrot and stick' in place. It seems that - in addition to the sticky - we have to invent the carroty.

p_quarles
February 28th, 2008, 07:32 AM
I can confirm from my own observation that the stickies tend to be somewhat less visible than the body of a forum. I do not know why this is so. At times, it takes me several visits to notice that the stickies have been changed while I see the changes in the body at first glance.
One reason for the view count differential is very straightforward: people usually only look at a sticky once. I have read the sticky in question once, whereas I have viewed this thread dozens of times.

I'm assuming here -- without knowing for sure -- that the view count mechanism counts unique visitors per 24/hrs. Since your initial post was over a week ago, it's probably counted me a good 8 or 9 times already.

Forrest Gumpp
February 28th, 2008, 01:06 PM
It may well be that your respective very erudite responses may be correct with respect as to how the site records views of, for example, (dare I say it?,) Stickies, (may the Deity forgive), BUT...

and there is always a 'but', isn't there?...

.....I have carefully watched the aftermaths of my own visitations of threads and sites which I may singularly or multiply have revisited on this forum, and in no case have I detected any increase in the number of views seemingly recorded after I have once first visited.

DO PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG, if wrong I be! I have no inside information as to how the Forum works, but my strong impression is that once visited, that's it, so far as automatic records of site visitations are concerned.

Can anyone say me nay?

LaRoza
February 28th, 2008, 04:07 PM
It may well be that your respective very erudite responses may be correct with respect as to how the site records views of, for example, (dare I say it?,) Stickies, (may the Deity forgive), BUT...

and there is always a 'but', isn't there?...

.....I have carefully watched the aftermaths of my own visitations of threads and sites which I may singularly or multiply have revisited on this forum, and in no case have I detected any increase in the number of views seemingly recorded after I have once first visited.

DO PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG, if wrong I be! I have no inside information as to how the Forum works, but my strong impression is that once visited, that's it, so far as automatic records of site visitations are concerned.

Can anyone say me nay?

People do tend to ignore the stickies, unless directed to them.

I have, at one point, replaced the stickies with links to some wild sites but no one noticed.

Forrest Gumpp
February 29th, 2008, 07:29 PM
LaRoza,

Loved the idea of your replacing the Stickies content with wild sites from time to time. :lolflag:. Too bad it was BMT. (Before my time.)

Here is another wild site you might like: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=711065

I am trying to help, I really am. You can bank on it!

PS The Sticky view count has risen from 113 to 136 as I post. I am unable to assess whether this represents an increase in the rate of viewing since I posted on the subject of comparative view counts in this thread one day ago.. (Post # 28) What was the actual date and time you posted the Sticky?

PPS The cooley is a glitch. The post was number twenty eight. If I type the numeral eight I get a cooley. This is no laughing matter!:)