moderated Re: Trying to add member notice with existing type and name fails to issue warning, does nothing, navigates poorly #bug



Thanks. All of that makes perfect sense! I suspected something like that, except for the creation timestamp. 

A couple of suggestions at this point:

1. Figure out whether, and when, Active should be the default. Should it be consistently one way or the other, or should it be the default only if this is the first message of that type being created, etc? In particular, I would not continue to have it be the default in the cases where multiple active noticed are allowed. I think most users will not understand that if they create what (to them) is simply a new, or alternative, welcome notice, for example, it actually gets ADDED to any existing active one(s) and ALL are sent out as welcome messages. (I love the ability to do this. But it came as a shock to me.) Minimum, I would  add some explanation to the Active checkbox in those cases.

2. What is the purpose of a name, if it’s not an identifier, something that sets the notice apart from others of its same type? It makes no sense to me to allow multiple notices of the same type with identical names, and I would have the system reject those.

On Oct 7, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Mark Fletcher <> wrote:

Hi J,

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 8:55 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

I am very sorry to tell you this, but there are now other weirdnesses! I just tried again to create a new Banned notice in my test group. Here is what happened:

1. (a) There are now TWO Banned notices, listed as at the same time (same timestamp, a couple of minutes ago), one with name "Banned Member" (which was the correct name - the name I left in place as the default) and another with name "Banned."
    (b) Despite the (alleged) two new notices, there is only log entry for my having created a new notice.

2. My original, pre-test Banned notice, with "name not set," and creation date a long time ago, has disappeared.

What happened is that member notices really shouldn't have an empty name ("name not set"). That bug was fixed last December. When you added the new member notice, we went in and updated the old member notice, giving it a name ("Banned"). That changed the updated date on the notice (which was labeled 'Date' on the Member Notices page, but I've now changed that to 'Updated'). Confused? Make sense?

3. (a) The default, upon creation of the message, was that the Active box was checked. This is different from yesterday, when I reported the bug. At that time, it defaulted to unchecked.
    (b) Yet despite the default, both "new" notices were created as not active.

I just fixed this bug.



Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Join to automatically receive all group messages.