Gossamer Forum
Home : Products : Gossamer Forum : Discussion :

v.2 Feature Request

Quote Reply
v.2 Feature Request
I could be wrong, but right now it looks like we have the choice to force users to fill in a topic when they make a post or let them leave it blank, for the original post. Naturally, that means that any replies will automatically have the topic in place, repeating the topic and adding the user name of the post they are replying to ...

Is is possible to force the original poster to enter the topic, but give users the option of an autofill topic line or to leave it blank? It seems like a small thing, but I think the autofill makes people thing they can't change it or just plain promotes lazyness!

Any thoughts on this?

Steve

Visit The Guitar Diner
Quote Reply
Re: [Boomer] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
I do not think it's wrong how currently works. Personally I do change the subject, when it needs to change, because the topic changed in the meanwhile.

If the subject would be empty, it would make the people fill in, so each reply will have different subject. That's what would you want? I don't think so... But that's only my opinion.

BTW: You should not post a subject like this... "v.2 Feature Request". This misleads people. The subject would contain info about your post, e.g.:
[Suggestion] Leave topic blank to force people fill
or a shorter one
[Suggestion] Blank topic

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Last edited by:

webmaster33: Jan 1, 2003, 11:21 PM
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
>>
BTW: You should not post a subject like this... "v.2 Feature Request". This misleads people. The subject would contain info about your post, e.g.:
<<

Not everyone likes to post a subject line like a novel like you :)

His subject line was absolutely fine.

Last edited by:

Paul: Jan 2, 2003, 2:45 AM
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
I do not aggree. His subject was misleading and was not descriptive enough.
Would you like tons of new threads with subject "Feature Request", just because they want a new feature?
I suggested the form:
[suggestion] descriptive subject
or
[request] descriptive subject
form of subject line.

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
Quote:
I suggested the form:

My mother often says to me - "I want, never gets"

The word mis-leading obviously means to mis-lead someone and as the post subject reflected the post context then it was not mis-leading.

Last edited by:

Paul: Jan 2, 2003, 3:49 AM
Quote Reply
Re: [Boomer] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
Quote:
Is is possible to force the original poster to enter the topic, but give users the option of an autofill topic line or to leave it blank? It seems like a small thing, but I think the autofill makes people thing they can't change it or just plain promotes lazyness!

If this is something Jason will implement then cool, but if not you could definitely do this with a plugin. It would just be a matter of hooking the right places to make sure the OP has a subject line...if not you can return an error.
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
In Reply To:
Quote:
I suggested the form:

My mother often says to me - "I want, never gets"
He-he Laugh
You misinterpret something. I never wrote 'I WANT'! I suggest something, or ask for something, but NEVER say WANT. The reason, that I use the word 'I' is because it's basic part of English. I can't tell you this without using the word 'I'. Wink. But maybe my English is bad, and if so I can't argue with you, since you are English.
Your mother otherwise was right. I aggree. But that expression, is not true for me, because you adapted it incorrectly for my case.

The subject was not descriptive enough for me, so I wrote my opinion. In fact this would not worth more than a sentence. Let we stop here before we find ourself in a new argument, as it happened several times on the LSQL forums. Period.

Bye,
Webmaster33
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] v.2 Feature Request In reply to
Quote:
Let we stop here

I had already moved on :)