by Patrick ➕follow (60) ignore
« First « Previous Comments 552 - 591 of 604 Next » Last » Search these comments
WookieMan Can you show me an example of that?
OK, I bumped up the threads per day limit from 7 to 10. I'm a little worried about going higher because people could flood the home page.
Sometimes I'll re-post something about a Congressman in the dedicated thread for that guy if I find him mentioned in a different thread. Just so that everything about that guy can be looked up in one place.
https://patrick.net/post/1383454/2025-02-02-trump-week-three-the-thread?start=12#comment-2143593
I don't see real duplication, just quotes.
I don't see real duplication, just quotes.
The real problem is that ppl are too lazy to check if a thread for a topic already exists. So we end up with multiple threads of the same topic. Especially recently.
The meme image is duplicated 3 times, doesn't matter if it was quoted.
WookieMan says
The meme image is duplicated 3 times, doesn't matter if it was quoted.
That's how the quoting works.
I try to reduce the size of the image each time it's quoted, to reduce annoyance.
That doesn't mean you have to post in all of them. By default you're admitting guilt to this tactic. It's annoying as fuck.
still don't understand the need or WANT to post it in three different threads.
It's NOT POSTING. That's the part you don't get or refuse to.
Ooooooohhhhh. The baby cries. Hold on let me post this in 3 threads.
WookieMan says
Ooooooohhhhh. The baby cries. Hold on let me post this in 3 threads.
????? I didn't flag it. I dunno even what you originally said before it got flagged.
but I don't think I posted anything personal.
Here's an alternative to my current quoting system:
Instead of actually quoting, there would be a "reply" button which would paste a link back in the comment box to the comment you're talking about.
So the site would be less cluttered, but you would have to click that link back to the comment to see what the original comment said. Slightly more work in reading.
Should I do it?
Less work for me is definitely easier.
Patrick says
Here's an alternative to my current quoting system:
Instead of actually quoting, there would be a "reply" button which would paste a link back in the comment box to the comment you're talking about.
So the site would be less cluttered, but you would have to click that link back to the comment to see what the original comment said. Slightly more work in reading.
Should I do it?
The current system is better
I suppose the current system also has the advantage of freezing the text you are replying to. Someone could edit the original comment, but not the quote.
OkDOGEisAmountingToSomething
OK, that's possible, though a bit of work.
What would I call it, in one or two words?
People might try to game it though, by creating bogus users and then using them to like their own comments, for example.
richwicks Thanks for this.
The downside is that I would need to allow script tags from Twitter, which would give them absolute control over patrick.net, including the ability to read and report back anything on that page, and the ability to alter or censor content.
All 3rd party javascript can read and change anything on the page where it is included. I was just complaining about this issue on tax prep websites:
https://patrick.net/post/1381117/2024-04-03-taxact-and-taxhawk-give-google-open
« First « Previous Comments 552 - 591 of 604 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,294,397 comments by 15,437 users - HeadSet, Kepi, mell, stereotomy online now