And it's not just the multiquote problem either, viz
On the issue of website performance, has anyone who has been experiencing issues with slow page loading times noticed an improvement since "New Posts" was changed back to the old system yesterday?
I will sometimes copy and paste a long post into a text file just in case something goes wrong when I submit it. That way I can just copy it back and try again, although I am finding that I am doing this less now that the auto save feature automatically saves your posts as you compose them.
The multiquote feature makes responding to multiple posts relatively simple but some still find it easier to format longer posts containing several quotes in a word processor or a text editor such as Wordpad before copying it back into the post editor when it is ready to submit.
On the issue of website performance, has anyone who has been experiencing issues with slow page loading times noticed an improvement since "New Posts" was changed back to the old system yesterday?
No difference at all either way Joe, and nor should it. As I said before there it is highly unlikely there is any correlation between performance and the "New Posts". If anything. there should be a minuscule, non-noticeable increase in speed for the new system as the server handles less posts.
Cheers
Country Lad
I have never had this happen in any other forum and I participate in quite a few. Also it has only been in recent weeks.No Julia, think about it. The issue you have is losing a long post - somehow it doesn't post and it it lost.
This is a common issue with all forums. It could be the fact that as you submit the reply, someone else is submitting at the same time in the same thread (the most common cause).
Or there is a hiccup with your ISP or with the forum server or the sun is setting, or NSW has won the SOO, or any of those odd reasons that posts are lost. Then you need to start all over again.
OK, that's reasonable, but to have to do that seems to negate the whole purpose of the simplicity of the multiquote facility plus the autosave which doesn't , in this instance, seem to autosave at all.Safest way is to use the multiple quotes in the reply as normal so your reply now has them all. Copy and paste it to Word, then type your responses in between the quotes the same way as you would in the reply. When finished, copy from Word. Then in the reply window, highlight all those quotes (everthing) and paste.
This over-writes all those quotes, there is your complete response and all the multi quotes are unclicked. If the post doesn't go through (as can happen (often) you still have it in Word. Then just open the "Reply to Thread" window (that is not with the quotes) and paste again from Word.
That's when the auto save works. If you get frozen and have to log off and log on again, sometimes even having to reboot before so doing, it's all lost.I will sometimes copy and paste a long post into a text file just in case something goes wrong when I submit it. That way I can just copy it back and try again, although I am finding that I am doing this less now that the auto save feature automatically saves your posts as you compose them.
Yes, absolutely. It is now fine, entirely up to that for other sites.On the issue of website performance, has anyone who has been experiencing issues with slow page loading times noticed an improvement since "New Posts" was changed back to the old system yesterday?
Funny then that ASF is absolutely the only site where I have had any problem whatsoever.Likely not an issue for Joe. The internet has apparently been having intermittent problems for about an hour, especially some Telstra sites. My Pulse wasn't responding and I couldn't place an order - had to phone it through because it wass quicker. Another forum I was on would not intermittently respond.
Exactly.Yeah the "auto save" facility works well. But it is useless when you can't load the post. Several times I had to reload windows explorer, log back into the ASF stite, open the thread, initate the "reply to thread" option, open the "saved content" of a post previuosly prepared and then experience the same problem with loading the post to the thread. Kind of frustrating to say the least.
My experience also. Much relief, thank you Joe.Touch wood, all post since the reversion have gone through smoothly.
Because I don't experience it.I wonder why you are so apparently determined to disbelieve the reality of a described experience.
I will sometimes copy and paste a long post into a text file just in case something goes wrong when I submit it. That way I can just copy it back and try again, although I am finding that I am doing this less now that the auto save feature automatically saves your posts as you compose them.
The multiquote feature makes responding to multiple posts relatively simple but some still find it easier to format longer posts containing several quotes in a word processor or a text editor such as Wordpad before copying it back into the post editor when it is ready to submit.
On the issue of website performance, has anyone who has been experiencing issues with slow page loading times noticed an improvement since "New Posts" was changed back to the old system yesterday?
Seeing 6 or 7 pages of "recent, but unread" posts didn't make me really browse back because I don't have that much spare time anyway.
Pixel, when you are finished on the forum and have not had an interest in some topics, do you not click "Mark Forums Read"? The next time you log in to the site it will show only the new posts which should be only a page or 2 of only new posts as long as you are going to the bookmarked page for "New Posts".
Cheers
Country Lad
+1. Works well.Hey bigdog;
I've always used Today's Posts under Quick Links.
That gives me a manageable two pages, and the threads I've read are still listed in faded colour.
+1. Works well.
It seems, however, that pleasing one infrequent poster may possibly be causing considerable difficulties for others.
I sincerely apologise if you took offence at what I intended as just a factual comment, in that you are an infrequent poster, you suggested the change, and several of us - after it was implemented - experienced some really frustrating difficulties which appear now to have been resolved.Wow. That's just plain rude.
I never advocated for the change so I didn't see it as "pleasing" me as you have so patronisingly put it. I just made a suggestion as a new user to a forum I have never come across. So typical of some older forums to have old in the tooth users being just plain rude to new users. How is that sort of post meant to encourage me to post or participate? But I guess that's what you'd probably prefer.
I sincerely apologise if you took offence at what I intended as just a factual comment, in that you are an infrequent poster, you suggested the change, and several of us - after it was implemented - experienced some really frustrating difficulties which appear now to have been resolved.
As my comment was absolutely not intended to offend, the same cannot be said for your response which is a piece of clearly personally directed rudeness.
Wow. That's just plain rude.
I never advocated for the change so I didn't see it as "pleasing" me as you have so patronisingly put it. I just made a suggestion as a new user to a forum I have never come across.
So typical of some older forums to have old in the tooth users being just plain rude to new users.
How is that sort of post meant to encourage me to post or participate? But I guess that's what you'd probably prefer
I am making a statement of fact that you are an "old hand" when it comes to posting in this forum.
Making assumptions about age and generalisation about attitude to new users.So typical of some older forums to have old in the tooth users being just plain rude to new users.
There was no reference to being an 'old hand' which may indeed be factual.
What you actually said was:
Making assumptions about age and generalisation about attitude to new users.
Btw I didn't 'hate the change'. Didn't matter to me one way or the other as I always used "Today's Posts'" via "Quick Links" anyway. I simply responded to Nulla Nulla's suggestion that the timing of page loading problems several of us were experiencing coincided with the change and agreed with his request for the change to be reversed to see if it seemed to resolve the problem.
So far it does.
I won't be further responding on this, coolcup.
...So am I correct in thinking that if I click on "New Posts" I will actually see "New Posts" ?
gg
There was no reference to being an 'old hand' which may indeed be factual.
What you actually said was:
Making assumptions about age and generalisation about attitude to new users.
Btw I didn't 'hate the change'. Didn't matter to me one way or the other as I always used "Today's Posts'" via "Quick Links" anyway. I simply responded to Nulla Nulla's suggestion that the timing of page loading problems several of us were experiencing coincided with the change and agreed with his request for the change to be reversed to see if it seemed to resolve the problem.
So far it does.
I won't be further responding on this, coolcup.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?