Author Topic: Attention Mod (Read 32907 times)

jgpaiva · « **Reply #25 on:** January 26, 2008, 06:20 AM »

I also use the same method as f0dder, check every thread through the "unread topics".
Thus, something like this would be sort of redundant for me, since someone would be calling me to a thread that i already have or will read.
App's comments were exactly what i thought the first time i read this, some mod like this would sort of eliminate the "plausible deniability" which can be useful in some situations.

Imagine this situation:
Someone opens a new thread on coding snacks that i find too complex/impossible to do. I don't answer, as i wouldn't add anything interesting other than a "sorry, i can't do it" comment.
Then, if someone comes and says "hey, i can't do it, but maybe jgpaiva can do it?", then i have to reply and say "no, i can't do it".
Then, we have 2 replys saying "can't be done", and someone who actually could do it might be intimidated, or might think that it's being solved already (if he only noticed that it already had replys and didn't read them).

Another situation is where i keep some coding snacks unanswered, but keep the thread open on opera (opera is like my online todo list, the open tabs are kept open through sessions and keep the stuff i'm supposed to do in the future), so that if i have time, i'll do it in the future or if i don't, i ditch it. This system would force me to say "oh, i think i might do this", and then i'd feel bad if i didn't.

See what i mean?

nosh · « **Reply #26 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:00 AM »

I can see someone like f0dder getting a lot of these SOS thingies....

Hmm... I wonder if we could manage to link this mod up to his bedside alarm clock!

PhilB66 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:10 AM »

I wonder if we could manage to link this mod up to his bedside alarm clock!
-nosh (January 26, 2008, 08:00 AM)

Not a problem, modify this one

Darwin · « **Reply #28 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:11 AM »

Just thinking out loud here...

I like the "Send this topic" idea and would suggest a new button be available when you receive one of them that is a simple "Thanks for the invite, but I cannot participate at this time." This would then be promoted as the socially acceptable way to decline to participate *for what ever reason", no time, not in the right headspace, you secretly despise the person sending the invite, whatever.
-tinjaw (January 26, 2008, 04:42 AM)

I like this because if we let it be the "conventional" (socially acceptable) way to decline to participate, it would be considered a complete and sufficient response - i.e. no other action on the part of the invited user expected or necessary.

nosh · « **Reply #29 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:24 AM »

This is trivial but I'll mention it anyway...

How about a way to acknowledge a regular post as read...

I'm often caught between saying something (when I have nothing to say) just to acknowledge a post or being silent and thereby possibly being perceived as rude...

Darwin · « **Reply #30 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:27 AM »

Reading f0dder and João's description of how they read the forum leads me to believe that it's time for me to re-think how I do it - I start with "Show new replies to your posts" and then move onto the main "Forum" page and check out "Recent Posts". Occasionally, I'll check out the "Show unread posts (since last visit)" and "Show latest topics" tabs. I guess I miss a lot!

Darwin · « **Reply #31 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:30 AM »

nosh - I'm not sure where you're going with that idea? You mean have some sort of way of tagging a thread as "read by nosh" so that the poster can see who has and who has not read, and not replied, to a posting/thread? OR do you mean a more prominent display of the number of times that a topic has been read - beyond the column displayed on the main board page, next to the link to the topic? Or have I missed your meaning entirely...

f0dder · « **Reply #32 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:41 AM »

I always launch URLs from my topic reply email notifications before hitting "show unread", by the way.

nosh · « **Reply #33 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:56 AM »

I'm basically looking for a way to say 'duly noted' without having to say it in so many words. Haven't really given the technical aspect a thought.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #34 on:** January 26, 2008, 10:17 AM »

I also use the same method as f0dder, check every thread through the "unread topics".
Thus, something like this would be sort of redundant for me, since someone would be calling me to a thread that i already have or will read.
App's comments were exactly what i thought the first time i read this, some mod like this would sort of eliminate the "plausible deniability" which can be useful in some situations.

Imagine this situation:
Someone opens a new thread on coding snacks that i find too complex/impossible to do. I don't answer, as i wouldn't add anything interesting other than a "sorry, i can't do it" comment.
Then, if someone comes and says "hey, i can't do it, but maybe jgpaiva can do it?", then i have to reply and say "no, i can't do it".
Then, we have 2 replies saying "can't be done", and someone who actually could do it might be intimidated, or might think that it's being solved already (if he only noticed that it already had replies and didn't read them).

Another situation is where i keep some coding snacks unanswered, but keep the thread open on opera (opera is like my online todo list, the open tabs are kept open through sessions and keep the stuff i'm supposed to do in the future), so that if i have time, i'll do it in the future or if i don't, i ditch it. This system would force me to say "oh, i think i might do this", and then i'd feel bad if i didn't.

See what i mean?
-jgpaiva (January 26, 2008, 06:20 AM)

I can see your point (helps me see App's point better) and I have a thought...

-=o=- Given that there is courtesies extended on DC, would the idea of a counter make this any more palatable? Here is what I mean... If I as a poster clicked "the button" to send the "call" the dialog says, "You are requesting jgpaiva's assistance. Please be advised this member has 3 active calls and has 9 attempts in the last 24 hours. Are you sure you want to contact jgpaiva at this time?" The "attempts" aspect would be how many times a call was attempted, but when asked "Are you sure...?" the call attempt was aborted, either due to common courtesy, the caller decided that it would be a while before action could be taken, whatever.

What do you think?

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #35 on:** January 26, 2008, 10:34 AM »

I can see someone like f0dder getting a lot of these SOS thingies....
-nosh (January 26, 2008, 08:00 AM)

Right, let's add this to the mix then...

Service Queues

-=o=- The thought I have is to take the personal aspect out altogether. What if the call was made to a "Service Queue" rather than an individual member? This would eliminate the need to even respond, and would not produce any privacy issues. The "call" would be directed to the queues. Let me offer a simple example...
Say a call went to an Emergence BASIC queue. Myself, mrainey, etc. would have "attributes" in our profile that identifies us to the server that we are available to help if a call comes in for assistance with EBASIC. If a call comes in from the queue as a simple alert stating that "iluveb" (or whatever member) needs assistance with a short comment "Hey, EBer's I'm having trouble with the @STATIC , can you help me?" Both mrainey and myself would receive the alert and neither of us would be required to respond in any way (although the whole idea is to match issues to solutions

). Yet, either or both of us could respond if we chose to.

This almost looks like a pointer to the idea of "We already have this in the ability to post a new thread asking for help, don't we?"
Sort of... the ability to post a new thread is an option, but it has some problems...
(1) Because it is a new thread, it would break the continuity of the thread where the original need presented itself.
(2) It doesn't really "call" for assistance. It would depend on chance for an issue to be addressed.
(3) Again, because no "call" was issued, members that are able and willing to help would also have to depend on chance.

[Disclaimer - the use of "mrainey" is only for example due to his involvement and does not suggest that he should be involved.]

<edit> added quote </edit>

tinjaw · « **Reply #36 on:** January 26, 2008, 02:27 PM »

I think the service queues idea waters it down to what we have now. Namely forums with topics and people who are interested in helping read the threads in those forums. f0dder already reads the threads where he can help and I read threads where I can help.

Here is one example that supports your origional idea of signaling somebody. I have been ultra busy the past week and have let several pages of new threads pile up. However, you sent me a PM and asked me to respond to a thread. I did have time to go to a specific thread and answer a specific topic, so the PM served its purpose.

I think the fact that you *can* PM anybody, but that it does take more than a single click to do so, provides the proper barrier to abuse. If you want somebody to join in on a thread enough that you are willing to take the time to PM them, it sort of acts as a filter.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #37 on:** January 26, 2008, 03:16 PM »

i like the idea of modifying the "Send This Topic" page to allow you to send a topic to a user on the forum not just to an email address.
this way we don't have to add any new "buttons" and i think the "Send this Topic" idea captures the same idea that has been suggested here -- and why should the "send this topic" only work with emails -- seems natural to extend it to work with forum names and send it as a message through the forum.
-mouser (January 26, 2008, 03:50 AM)

I agree that it requires little work to make happen, which is beneficial and it would fulfill the requirements to an extent.

If the "Send Topic" were modified to blank email addresses, make the comment field more user friendly, it still leaves the recipient "Guru" with somewhat of a chore to do, i.e., get to the location of the post where assistance was requested.

My thinking is to make things as easy on the "Guru" as possible, but not too easy, (as tinjaw has alluded to). The less obstacles that have to be overcome by the "Guru" and the more specific the target post, the more likely the "Guru" would respond, IMO. Given this, is it possible to somehow mark the specific post within the "Send Topic" dialog to capture the specific address? BTW - I did test using the right-click >> copy post link >> open "Send Topic" >> paste in Comment box scenario, but due to the current text limitation, after pasting the whole "https://www.donation.....rmsg98591#msg98591" post link URL, there is exactly enough room left for " - We need help with a".

f0dder has said that the PMs are wasted on him because he misses them, somehow, but he stated that he does receive email. He is not alone, because that is how I find my PMs (ok, I'm not a guru, but maybe someday?

) Including email addresses may need to be considered as an option, but only in a "black-boxed" method.

Mouser, (??), etc., since you are one close to the Tech Team, what are your views on these points?

FMI - would modifying the "Comment" box on the "Send Topic" dialog be just a matter of making "130px x 20px" into "130px x 100px" in the software, or is it more involved?

mouser · « **Reply #38 on:** January 26, 2008, 03:23 PM »

it still leaves the recipient "Guru" with somewhat of a chore to do, i.e., get to the location of the post where assistance was requested.

do you mean beause it only sends the thread url not a specific post url?

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #39 on:** January 26, 2008, 03:34 PM »

it still leaves the recipient "Guru" with somewhat of a chore to do, i.e., get to the location of the post where assistance was requested.

do you mean because it only sends the thread url not a specific post url?
-mouser (January 26, 2008, 03:23 PM)

Yes

Did you come to this post via the PM, or was it just happenstance?

The reason I ask is if it was the PM, then there is an avenue to gain specific assistance, if the requester is familiar with the "tricks." The other reason I ask is there have been over 340 views of this thread and only a handful of participants. Maybe it is early yet, but there doesn't seem to be much interest in this project. I wonder if it is time to shelve it and move on?

Edit - forgot the smiley and other comment

Darwin · « **Reply #40 on:** January 26, 2008, 03:50 PM »

I'm basically looking for a way to say 'duly noted' without having to say it in so many words. Haven't really given the technical aspect a thought.
-nosh (January 26, 2008, 08:56 AM)

10-4

Sorry, couldn't resist.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #41 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:08 PM »

I'm basically looking for a way to say 'duly noted' without having to say it in so many words. Haven't really given the technical aspect a thought.
-nosh (January 26, 2008, 08:56 AM)

10-4

Sorry, couldn't resist.
-Darwin (January 26, 2008, 03:50 PM)

<Off Topic>

That's a big 10-2 on the 10-4. The 10-36 says I should 10-3 and go 10-7.

I actually can still remember a lot of these, but the young drivers out there don't even know what I'm saying!

Completely OT for Darwin

The Complete CB 10-codes:
----------------------------

10-1 = Receiving poorly
10-2 = Receiving well
10-3 = Stop transmitting
10-4 = OK, message received
10-5 = Relay message
10-6 = Busy, stand by
10-7 = Out of service, leaving air
10-8 = In service, subject to call
10-9 = Repeat message
10-10 = Transmission completed, standing by
10-11 = Talking too rapidly
10-12 = Visitors present
10-13 = Advise Weather/Road conditions
10-16 = Make pick up at ...
10-17 = Urgent business
10-18 = Anything for us?
10-19 = Nothing for you, return to base
10-20 = My location is ...
10-21 = Call by telephone
10-22 = Report in person to ...
10-23 = Stand by
10-24 = Completed last assignment
10-25 = Can you contact ...
10-26 = Disregard last information
10-27 = I am moving to channel ...
10-28 = Identify your station
10-29 = Time is up for contact
10-30 = Does not conform to FCC rules
10-32 = I will give you a radio check
10-33 = EMERGENCY TRAFFIC
10-34 = Trouble at this station
10-35 = Confidential information
10-36 = Correct time is ...
10-37 = Wrecker needed at ...
10-38 = Ambulance needed at ...
10-39 = Your message delivered
10-41 = Please turn to channel
10-42 = Traffic accident at ...
10-43 = Traffic tie up at ...
10-44 = I have a message for you
10-45 = All units within range please report
10-50 = Break channel
10-60 = What is next message number?
10-62 = Unable to copy, use phone
10-63 = Net directed to ...
10-64 = Net clear
10-65 = Awaiting your next message/assignment
10-67 = All units comply
10-70 = Fire at ...
10-71 = Proceed with transmission in sequence
10-77 = Negative contact
10-81 = Reserve hotel room for ...
10-82 = Reserve room for ...
10-84 = My telephone number is ...
10-85 = My address is ...
10-91 = Talk closer to the mike
10-93 = Check my frequency on this channel
10-94 = Please give me a long count
10-99 = Mission completed, all units secure
10-200 = Police needed at ...

I couldn't resist either.

</Off Topic>

Edit - various corrections and additions

nosh · « **Reply #42 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:29 PM »

Maybe we can use 10-3 for off-topic. I know I'd get a lot of those.

Interesting stuff, CodeTRUCKER.

10-11 for wazzisname? The smf alien-talk guy...

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #43 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:35 PM »

Maybe we can use 10-3 for off-topic. I know I'd get a lot of those.

Interesting stuff, CodeTRUCKER.

10-11 for wazzisname? The smf alien-talk guy...
-nosh (January 26, 2008, 04:29 PM)

Thanks. I guess you are talking about Gri. I spent some time while I was on sabbatical from DC to get a handle on what he is all about. mostly lurked. Nice guy, once you get past the language/understanding barrier. He reminds me somewhat of what I know about Galileo.

Darwin · « **Reply #44 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:41 PM »

Heh, heh - that was cool, CodeTrucker. Thank you for the listing of trucker's CB codes. I'm with nosh - I like 10-3 for OT. Like nosh, I figure I'd garner a lot of those

nosh · « **Reply #45 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:46 PM »

I thought he posted weird on purpose, just for laughs.
10-36 0400 10-7

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #46 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:48 PM »

Heh, heh - that was cool, CodeTrucker. Thank you for the listing of trucker's CB codes. I'm with nosh - I like 10-3 for OT. Like nosh, I figure I'd garner a lot of those
-Darwin (January 26, 2008, 04:41 PM)

Glad you liked it! I didn't have the heart to foist all those codes on you without giving you a key.

/10-3

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #47 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:53 PM »

I thought he posted weird on purpose, just for laughs.
10-36 0400 10-7
-nosh (January 26, 2008, 04:46 PM)

Nosh, ever thought about driving a truck?

No, it takes some work, but you eventually break through the disorientation of the *niks and begin to see the picture; however, for whatever reason, the subject of Gri ignites things (I was guilty too

) so if you want to discuss it further, perhaps PM is a better avenue.

J-Mac · « **Reply #48 on:** January 27, 2008, 01:26 PM »

Personally I see this as much ado about a non-issue. Just keep things as they are and use the methods of notification that are available now. In this case, a PM would suffice. I tend to agree with app103 that this could get to be overwhelming for certain members. I also agree that a non-response, same as a No - might be taken wrong by some requesting members. Particularly if they feel the need to inform a thread's participants about why a member they announced they were inviting hasn't shown up.

The convenience added is minuscule, IMO. Yet the potential for hurt feelings is added at the same time. BTW, I would certainly NOT be one of the members who would tend to be invited for my expertise!! So this is not a self-serving post!

Thanks.

Jim

mouser · « **Reply #49 on:** January 27, 2008, 01:29 PM »

I think adding ability to send to a member from the Send This Topic page is a no brainer and should be added.
CodeTrucker has a point that that doesn't let you send a specific message, which is unfortunate, but im not sure it warrants adding another button to every post.
So my inclination is to put on my todo list a change to the Send This Topic page which:

Expands size of comment field
Lets you put in user names instead of emails to send to and sends them a PM if you do

I do think this feature could be useful -- for example people sometimes email me and let me know there is apost about one of my programs that i havent replied to yet, and so i think this would make this easier.