 | | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) ... (...) Reading via mail/news - voting was never implemented for those readers. (20 years ago, 31-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) How many people read LUGNET like that? Would it be worth it to implement voting for those readers? Or are the non technical factors more significant? (20 years ago, 31-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) I don't know the stats for people reading via NNTP, but according to the lugnet.admin.statistics posts, there's about 3000 SMTP users - more than the number of members (people who can vote right now). (20 years ago, 31-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Yup, that's my number one reason for not voting. Until the web interface tracks what I have read and allows me to manage it, I will fundamentally continue to read by NNTP. Frank (20 years ago, 31-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Voting via email might be possible, although annoying and pretty unsecure. A reply by default just goes to the list. You'd have to somehow send your member ID (and password!) and a flag that says "I'm spotlighting this" via SMTP that would get (...) (20 years ago, 31-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Stats for 2004: Total posts via logged in web users: 34,682 Total posts by NNTP/SMTP/non-logged in users: 62,036 Unique web members: 597 Unique non-logged-in posting members: 1,685 So, about 1/4 of the posters are posting 1/2 of the content (...) (20 years ago, 31-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Hmmmn. I don't know what to make of those numbers - except that its a very high number people who just don't see the "highlighting" drilldown. SUGGESTION Clearly Todd already has * a way of highlighting posts * parsing emails to take actions * (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Well, the issue would really be authenticating the user as a member, and making sure the message didn't get posted if they composed it incorrectly. Since only members are allowed to vote (and when viewing from SMTP/NNTP you can't see (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Agreed. No way would you want someone to send a password in plain text. (...) That's what I was thinking - same as current posting authentication. (...) Hmmn. Good point; this could be (mostly) addressed during the authentication stage: For (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Just to clarify - this is the total number of posts in 2004 - by everyone, logged in, web, email, news, you name it. (20 years ago, 1-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) I do think it would be a good idea. With the current imlpementation though, I don't think it's easy to actually corralate posts with the memebers who post them. (20 years ago, 1-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
|
(...) Except that this step isn't happening right now. The server doesn't actually know that this post is from member 179 - it just knows that this email addressed has been allowed to post with these headers. Yes, updating the posting setup form to (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
