Hrqls: Timestamps are not important in the thread view. The tree structure of roots and leaves is shown.

Fencer: although it shows some weird sorting as the post from mook53lhd shows above my previous 2 posts, while those were made earlier on the day :)

Fencer: very good. i like the way you incorporated .in other words if you`re browsing & a post catches your eye.you can find all posts relating to it.thats much better than some of the so called pro message boards .not complicated at all. you can find something old & buried & look it over & even ressurect the old subj. good show. as if you`re not a regular its ezy to get disgusted when cliques are just shooting the breeze ,but not saying anything + making it virtually impossible to just enter a msg without feeling like an unwanted interloper tyvm mook53lhd

Hrqls: hah! that enwidened (?) the box again :)

Silkwood: another test :)

Hrqls: testing .. testing.. one .. two.. 3

Fencer: Judging from the posts concerning this change, I hope it shows you how important the discussion boards and posting are to this site.

Eriisa: I like it!!!!

Eriisa: awesome! hats off to fencer! :)

Hrqls: hey, this box is so much easier too!

thats me trying to work out the threads lol

Fencer: ah nice!

hehe i just noticed the boxes dont get smaller anymore .. i guess we reached the minimum size (width) :)

Hrqls: lol .. the most-new posts in the thread are at the bottom though :( ... and they are getting smaller and smaller .. so as long as enough people answer to this thread their replies will disappear before shown :)

Hrqls: Works only for those with enabled JavaScript.

wow! nice! and a small box-link is also added next to the reply button :)

volant:

Groucho: and a raise!

Eriisa Fencer needs to keep that programmer!

Vikings: *whispers* Its a conspiracy, you know!

Pedro Martínez:
thanks

Vikings:

Vikings: but you can change it!

Pedro Martínez: maybe there is something that I am missing, if the reply button was hit, wouldn't the header in this case say re: show thread unless someone erased it and changed it?

Vikings: The header is not necessarily important. The "Reply" button is.

BIG BAD WOLF: I must be thick in the head tonight, shouldn't they be different treads since they have different headers

Vikings: That was me - I actually replied to those 2 very old post (from 2002) just to see if it worked with post from way back then. (one of the first on the board) :-)

I wonder if it has a small bug, I just clicked on this tread and it showed two more post that weren't related

BIG BAD WOLF: now that is AWESOME!!!!

BIG BAD WOLF: Yes, I've used it too. Pretty cool addition!

BIG BAD WOLF: I just did now thats kewl.

Did anyone else notice the new "show thread" feature? I replied to a post from 2002 to see how well it works.

Way to go Fencer! It's hard to follow some threads!

emmett:I agree with you that Harley is a very good moderator, but I also disagree that she is the only one. There are a lot of very good moderators on this site as well as some that might be questionable. I do hate to see them all lumped together as not good in your post.

emmett: toodles

Tuesday: As for creating my own fellowship, I'll have to think about it. Since Pawns can't join and some people won't for a variety of reasons, I see little use in doing so. Perhaps I could create a general discussion fellowship and let all join that wish to and have the topic change from time to time or just let any subject be discussed.

emmett: It is in most ways not worth my trouble. So I'm not going to bother with it any more until I see some changes or am actively sought out for my help or opinion.
I've said enough and it should be apparent as to where my sentiments lie.

I am talking about moderation issues, not multi nics and handles. Why this keeps getting confused is beyond me. The two can be related. The multi-nics thing is just one of many subjects that have shown to me what is wrong with the moderation system. As I can't go to where I can post about it, that's the end of it unless things change.

emmett: I agree with alot of what you have just said, along with alot of what others have said on the subject.....I don't think your post should be deleted either!

I wish multi nics were an impossiblility!! I hate to see people abusing peoples emotions, even on a game site!

Walter Montego: well yes, for paying members because only paying members can have or be in fellowships. It's a priviledge for paying members. But anyone who is a paying member can create their own fellowship for anything they want. There have been many made for moderating issues. In fact, Kipling may still have one. I'm not sure. But you can create a fellowship for anything you want.

Walter Montego: Invite them! I'd join, if I'd be welcome. I'm sure many others would too.

Tuesday: It is an idea, but what's the point? Just how am I going to get those that I want to talk to to join?

baddessi: You mean paying members, right? Perhaps you and Harley can use your pull with the Big Boss and get me in. It obviously isn't without precedent having a non-moderator as a member. Even if let in, it will only be this group and not the whole of the membership. For those of us that like to post and have issues with how the moderation system is set up on this site there's nowhere to air our thoughts on it to a general audience of all of us.

I haven't had a look through fellowships in a long time.

I'm sorry you feel that way, Walter. Maybe Tuesday has the answer, start your own fellowship.

harley: actually, I think there used to be a couple of them.(fellowships about Mods open to all members)...
Clay had one, Thad had one and so did Taz. If I'm not mistaken, those are all gone now.

harley: I understand that fellowships can have whatever members they want. Some fellowships are organized for other reasons. What it amounts to is I have no place to post to a general audience, nor do I have access to the one group of people that might want to hear me out or sound some of their own ideas off me and others.

Actually, now I think on it some more, Medic's isn't the only fellowship dedicated to the issue of moderating. Maybe if you ask on the fellowships board someone will know one thats open to all.

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=24

Walter Montego: Fellowships can be run however the big boss wants. Some are open to all, some are very select. It depends entirely on the individual running it. I don't think this is a reflection on BrainKing itself.

emmett: I disagree with you saying the posts are meaningless or irrelevant. Perhaps you have tired of the subjects or whatever. You're entitled to your opinion of what is posted, as am I.

What's with all this favorite board stuff? Anyone can still access a board whether or not you have the link on your main page. The ones I choose to have on my main page are ones I commonly read or post to. Who cares if you remove a board from your main page. Is this supposed to enlighten us in some way?

harley: No, I meant the Mod Squad. I have no intention of joining some fellowship about Bumble. I don't really want to join the Mod squad either, but it was you a few weeks ago that suggested I do join it to discuss ways to improve the moderation system on this site. I also posted that I thought the moderation system was something that should be discussed in a public forum so that Pawn members could have imput too. Now we're hiding behind some arbitrary rule of not letting non-moderators into the fellowship. It proves how closed the fellowships are, even to paying members such as myself. As to why they won't let me in, I question the reason of not letting me join because I'm not moderator. Bumble isn't a moderator and yet he's in that fellowship. I was planning on posting about moderation issues. Seeing how anybody can be a moderator why should it matter if someone is a moderator to join this fellowship? I can only conclude the moderators are happy with the status quo. As my link complained, they really don't care. You have seen and read my posts about moderation. I'm sure some of the other moderators have to.