Bugs and feature requests
Found a problem on B3ta? Want other features that we don't currently offer? Type your ideas here with your finger-mouths. (We don't promise we'll act on any of it, but we will read it and your words could even prompt us into action.)
( , Wed 1 Nov 2006, 11:48)
Found a problem on B3ta? Want other features that we don't currently offer? Type your ideas here with your finger-mouths. (We don't promise we'll act on any of it, but we will read it and your words could even prompt us into action.)
( , Wed 1 Nov 2006, 11:48)
« Go Back
One of the things that causes ructions on the /talk board in particular
is the way that sometimes many threads will be posted in succession, and conversations that you're having disappear down the board. After all, you can't tell how many other people are typing a post at any time.
How about a system whereby you click 'post' as normal, but if another post has been entered in a certain time period (say one or two minutes) its appearance on the board is paused until the time has elapsed? I'd suggest a screen to come up notifying you that the post has been queued, maybe with a countdown as per the naughty step?
If applied to the image board it would also ensure that posts got at least 30 mins' exposure (if it's still 15 threads at a time). Bonus.
( , Tue 9 Jan 2007, 16:31, Reply)
is the way that sometimes many threads will be posted in succession, and conversations that you're having disappear down the board. After all, you can't tell how many other people are typing a post at any time.
How about a system whereby you click 'post' as normal, but if another post has been entered in a certain time period (say one or two minutes) its appearance on the board is paused until the time has elapsed? I'd suggest a screen to come up notifying you that the post has been queued, maybe with a countdown as per the naughty step?
If applied to the image board it would also ensure that posts got at least 30 mins' exposure (if it's still 15 threads at a time). Bonus.
( , Tue 9 Jan 2007, 16:31, Reply)
« Go Back