 | | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
Hey, Just wanted to second the idea of excluding unreviewed posts from making the highlight lists. A couple of times recently I have posted MOCs and then been pleasantly surprised to see them on the highlight list the next time I went to Lugnet. But (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) I just now noticed this for myself. It used to be that the position of the add on each page would sequentially shuffle the order of the thumbnails depending on which frame it appeared in, but now the order seems random. I would bet that what (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) Um, I encourage people to spotlight posts every chance I get... (...) Adjusting spotlight weights isn't changing the whole scheme, though, is it? Spotlight weights have been around for a very long time and they get periodically adjusted. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) Point taken. There are a number of issues that LUGNET is struggling with, but this certainly is one of them. (...) Left that dangling... I agree that it doesn't. Personally I think it might be desireable to not consider posts that didn't get (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) I see this as being a key distinction. It's a perk of membership. If a person wants to be able to influence the focus of spotlights, they should become a member, otherwise the general lay visitor is stuck with what the members feel is (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) I agree that people not highlighting isn't necessarily a bad thing, UNLESS those people then complain about what shows up in the spotlight. Instead of encouraging those dissatisfied people to highlight more often, the admins rejiggered the (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) That's not really actionable, sorry. At least not for me anyway. (...) Great suggestions. However, they weren't clear to me, no... That is, they didn't jump out at me AS SUGGESTIONS at all. I've asked that posts that should be tracked as (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) I agree! IF everyone that cared about what hits the spotlight list consistently highlighted (or didn't highlight) things, you would be absolutely correct. (...) Right... We don't. BECAUSE, based on user comments, which we listen to carefully, (...) (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) Thanks, Marc. That helps my understanding of the current scheme ... Shaun (21 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
