Comment numbering
As of a few minutes ago, comment numbering works a little differently in the forum threads. If it turns out we all hate it, we can always go back to the old way.
Old way: each comment in the thread gets a tidy little sequential number in the upper right corner like #2, #3, etc.
New way: each comment displays it’s actual comment number in the database, looking more like this # 51332, and though the numbers always go from lower to higher, they are not strictly sequential in a thread (because other comments posted elsewhere in the site use up comment numbers, too).
Why do this?
Well, there were a couple of problems.
- Threads insisted on counting the initial post as #1… even though it isn’t really a comment. OK, nit-picky, but some of us don’t like nits.
- More seriously: whenever a comment was unpublished, it created a confusing scenario. The “old way” sequential numbering would count all visible comments. This meant that Moderators and Admins would see sequential numbers even on unpublished comments, while everyone else would not. So, for example, if we unpublished the third comment in the thread, registered users would see the next visible comment as “#3,” but Moderators would see the unpublished one as “#3” and the following one as “#4”.
In short, unpublishing comments messed the numbers all up. - People would refer to comment #55 or whatever, but later, if a comment was unpublished, that number would change, because only visible comments get counted.
The new way solves these problems: a comment number, though it is now a big honking five digit number, never changes—no matter what is unpublished or deleted or whatever. It’s a unique identifier.
So there it is. If any questions, do post and we’ll try to answer.
This comment post has the new numbering…
#2
Since the days of the original orange themed bulls-eye logo, Sharper Iron has historically held to a unique numeric identifier for each comment thread. I call upon the administration to preserve the historic traditions and retain the systems of our iForebears, identifying with the historic commenters of the past like walsup, DMD, and lilrabbi.
In identification with these “heroes,” I have retained my own personal numeric identifier at the top right corner of the comment.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
The ancient landmarks! #3
moving my cheese!
#4
:)
CanJAmerican - my blog
CanJAmerican - my twitter
whitejumaycan - my youtube
#5
This is clearly proof that SI is hurtling headlong down the slippery slope to ecumenism, compromise, and utter apostasy, if it isn’t already hopelessly compromised. Aaron’s obvious next move is to rescind the Doctrinal Statement entirely in the hopes of growing our membership site users.
I hereby call on all faithful SI members to leave and start our own new forum, at the conveniently titled “SIFaithfulBelieversToTheRaptureortheverybitterendForums.com”
…after I register that domain, that is. :)
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
I heard 3d or 4th hand from a friend of a friend of a friend (think Facebook), that Mr Blumer recently had an audience with the Pope … see partially obscured photo. And now with this forced Papal “resignation” … I mean … something is clearly up!
#7
#8
See…. same old numbering and same old logo.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
#9
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
I don’t think I’ve got that one in my collection. … I don’t even remember seeing that one. Early ‘05?
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
#11
That was an early working design, before the launch at Lansdale…
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
Discussion