| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > That sounds really really slick. But why bother? Isn't it way easier to just
> > give us two buttons than put a bunch of special purpose code in place for • that
> > use? Don't outthink yourself, and don't try to make things foolproof, fools
> > are too clever. That's my advice... KISS.
>
> Having two buttons (rather than just one) wouldn't solve the problem that it
> would solve -- i.e., the problem of accidental double-posting. Only way AFAIK
> to solve that is to embed a unique code into the posting form or to compare
> new incoming content with existing content....
True. that's the only way to SOLVE it. But double posting is due to human
error. This human errs because there are more steps than necessary. I claim
I'd make less mistakes if the path from post initiation to return to my
original place was shorter. Right now it is:
-view post prompting a reply press reply
-compose reply press preview
-preview screen press yes I mean it
-it got posted screen, read the text that sez "back button recommended", press
back
- preview screen.. hey was I here before? I forgot because I got a phone call
from a client between when I was here before or not... ya I was... press back
- posting screen.. darn it another interruption, was I here before? ya I was,
press back again.
- back to original post, whew safe.
Is that a lot of steps or what? Posting from news via NS is way less steps,
you press the reply to group button, you compose, you press send, you get a
pop up (not an HTML screen) telling you it went or it didn't and you're done.
No chance to double post unless you work at it because there are no steps
where you can go awry.
So, the two button approach while technically not SOLVING the problem, would
aid the user in not making the mistake in the first place. Frank Skinner, IBM
STSM, told me when I was a young young coder still wet behind the ears, set
your systems up so the user is aided in not making mistakes, and it's still
good advice 18 years later...
So that begs the question... WHY is pressing back recommended? You explained
it once, long ago. I forget. Maybe it had something to do with server load.
Who cares about that? I don't. Computers are here to serve us, not the other
way round. Buy a bigger server if you're running out of capacity (which
implies needing to pass the hat, I guess). (but of course that's my argument
about leaving trailing slashes off URLs too. Hey computer, don't chastise me,
just do what I mean, especially if you, silly computer, are smart enough to
already have figured it out and are taunting me by showing me the correct URL,
who's boss here, me or the computer?)
Stop recommending that we press the back button, and give a way to get back to
where we came from in one press after the post is confirmed, and you've gotten
at the root cause of the problem without the fancy techno-fix. Maybe you need
to set a cookie to remind you of which group the post you were viewing was
being viewed from so you go back to the right one, or something. I dunno.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Double the Fun
|
| (...) Having two buttons (rather than just one) wouldn't solve the problem that it would solve -- i.e., the problem of accidental double-posting. Only way AFAIK to solve that is to embed a unique code into the posting form or to compare new incoming (...) (24 years ago, 1-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
