Topic not found doesn't match expected post style
-
And this is why we give Jeff such a hard time.
-
Is this better? http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/topic-not-found-doesnt-match-expected-post-style/1144999
@apapadimoulis @dhromed @PJH this is your site and your choices, we just choose defaults.
If you don't like this delete the following from custom CSS
/* see http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/topic-not-found-doesnt-match-expected-post-style/1144 */ .page-not-found-topics { display: none; }Filed under: probelm sovled?
-
I like it but the idea of just hiding all that stuff whilst still doing the server work seems wrong.
-
I promise to fix this if this becomes a scale issue.
-
:) Realistically, I'd expect that it shouldn't since both recent and popular would, presumably, be indexed in the bowels of the da-ta-ba-se, meaning that it shouldn't be that expensive to get that data...
-
Search is still in never land, at least on mobile. I'll check desktop later.
-
Desktop has search. It seems a bit lonely on the left, perhaps it should be in the middle.
-
I like it
-
If only I were referring to here. Which I wasn't. I am well aware of the unique characteristics of thread drift inside TDWTF.
I'm talking as someone that has been visiting forums for years, following dead links for years and I don't ever EVER go... hmmm, I was looking for <specific piece of knowledge> and this site doesn't have it any more but it does have other topics about vaguely the same thing. No, I don't do that. Neither do any of the users I've ever watched. I introduced a number of people to the internet over the years and watched how they interacted with websites - and they do not operate the way you think they do. Maybe that's how you operate but you're not the same as anyone else, neither am I, neither are they.
It all depends on the context of where you're coming from. I'm coming at it from an external site, e.g. Google, .e.g. Wikipedia, linking to a specific but now defunct topic. These people will not suddenly stay, they will go elsewhere. Getting them to use the site-specific search is a best case scenario, compared to them going elsewhere immediately.
If, however, you're talking about a dead link from existing within the community, e.g. a topic referenced and then deleted... you're still stuffed because they are already, by definition, there and don't need to be reminded of the fluffy pink bunny love they could be experiencing.
But it seems clear to me that you're already in total denial to anything that doesn't fit your research because we're all clearly using the internet wrong.
After sitting on it, I like that idea.
If it's from an external link, only show the message.
If it's from an internal link, show the message and possibly related topics.
-
Related topics I could get behind. Anything else, not so much. If you're already there and finding it from an internal link, you don't really need the recent/popular topics because you'll have already gotten access to those anyway by already being there.
-
Desktop has search.
It seems confusing to me. I would expect "search this site" to use the built-in search facility, and "search Google" to be an unrestricted search. Instead, "search this site" is just text, and "search Google" searches this site using Google. Granted, searching the site using Google is more likely to produce usable results than Discurse's own search, but it's not the behavior I expected.
-
Related topics I could get behind
If they're actually related, yes. If the determination of "related" works as well as the determination of "similar" topics when creating a new topic, no. Worse Than Fail.
-
Is 'related' anything like 'suggested'? Because that's pretty random as to how good it is.
-
Is 'related' anything like 'suggested'? Because that's pretty random as to how good it is.
We've been told what the suggestion algorithm is, and the final stage is random. The earlier stages of the algorithm seem sensible, but I don't know how well they really work; I completely ignore the suggested topics, and only pay attention to the latest.
-
That was kind of my point ;)
-
It's all heuristics and maybes and what-not....the best you can hope for is really to get someone that is not used to the site interested in it.
There's no right or wrong, but opinion instead.
-
-
-
What about FILE_NOT_FOUND?
-
What about FILE_NOT_FOUND?
No, @chubertdev's original claim was that the condition is not binary. Therefore, right or wrong, FILE_NOT_FOUND is not a valid value.
Filed under: It's after 20:00, and I'm still at work. Going home now.
-
It's always valid.
-
public static bool isFILE_NOT_FOUNDvalid() { return true; }
-
```cs
public static bool isFILE_NOT_FOUNDvalid()
{
return FILE_NOT_FOUND;
}
-
-
All of them, simultaneously.
-
Which of the three valid bool values is FILE_NOT_FOUND?
There are four. You forgot nullity.
-
There are four. You forgot nullity.
That's FILE_NOT_FOUND divided by FILE_NOT_FOUND.
-
-
Summon Trogdor to burninate it?
-
Shouldn't at least one of those kids be licking a window?
@apapadimoulis @dhromed @PJH this is your site and your choices, we just choose defaults.
If you don't like this delete the following from custom CSS
I'll keep an eye on it.
-
Here's the thing... we're communicating the issues we see, and you're reflexively dismissing them for reasons too, as though your reasons for something are better than our reasons for disliking something.
Yeah, but then some guy ragequits because of something totally ridiculous.
Fuck you. I'm done trying to help you fix your shit.
I mean, no one is making anyone post meta / bugs, but getting angry over a 404 page‽ This is classic blakeyrant material. It's like the saying about academia, "Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low."
-
Only Al Gore knows the internets true purpose.
It's all about releasing chakras. Turns out it's pretty effective.
-
We've been told what the suggestion algorithm is, and the final stage is random.
I love that. It also rerolls every page load. More than once now I reached the end of a topic, already clicked on the logo to come back to the main page (since I had nothing unread left), and in the last second I caught an old topic I wasn't sure if I read in suggested. So I click back to get the suggested list again, and it's completely different.
Now, yes, I know, I could search for it, but if I only got the wording wrong slightly (due to only getting a cursory glance before it disappeared) the search is useless atm. I know @sam is trying to fix that, but as it stands I prefer to google with site:what.thedailywtf.com
-
So I click back to get the suggested list again
Didn't you read the memo? "Back" is supposed to be broken in Discurse. WONTFIX: Works as designed. Nobody should ever want to go back to where they were. If you think Discurse should work like every other web site ever since the Dawn of the Web, FOAD. You're Doing It Wrong™.
I prefer to google with site:what.thedailywtf.com
Good news. That's exactly what search from the 404 page does.Filed under: Do I really need to add sarcasm tags to this???
-
It's not so much that it's a 404 page. It's the fact that he's gone out of his way to try to bring attention to a bug - it could be any bug - and he feels that he has been shat on for it.
-
he has been shat on for it
Sure hope @codinghorror doesn't have a picture/meme for that.
-
This is a community about trolling. It has been described to us, repeatedly, as "a community of trolls".
But we're witty trolls. You're not.
You're like the kid in college who crashes a house party with a mostly drunk 0,7 of tequilla, high on weed, and grabbing asses of every female present. Because that's how college parties look like, right? Woohoo!
-
-
-
Judging by the general consensus most of us believe we are witty and most of us would agree to some degree that each other is witty, as evidenced by posts being liked outside of likewhoring topics like the Likes topic.
-
You believe you are, yes.
I'm witty, charming, and handsome.
And the rest of the forums is witty too.
-
-
Not witty enough. No likes for you.
-
Now why would you go and say that? Somebody is going to go like him now just to spite you.
-
@ben_lubar already had. This is just evidenc that I can only speak for myself, not for others.
-
