Topics

locked Message Number Box is gone! ACK!

Nightowl >8#
 

I was so so so afraid this would happen, that's why I tried to write about it last night to head it off!!!!

The message # Box has been merged with the search! Now I have to click on a drop down box, choose a choice and type in the number EACH time I reply to a post!

No no No, please please tell me this is something we can put back where it was? It will take me forever to do it that way, let alone a lot of extra mouse clicks affecting my RSI! Please put it back the other way????? Please?

Brenda

Nightowl >8#
 

Worse yet, when I try entering a message number using the drop down, the box is so big it covers up the archive so I can't read the message numbers if I need to and determine what post I want when I'm trying to find one!

Please....let this be a nightmare... please put the message# box back like it was.

Brenda
(Stressed out over this!)

Nightowl >8#
 

Okay. I'm calmer...(deep breath)

I'll try to explain more calmly and clearly what the problem is about merging the Message# box and the Search Box.

When I had the message# box, I could see only that Box, and no Search Box, which made me perfectly happy and worked just great. I had a small magnifying glass icon that I knew if I clicked it would open my search box if I needed it, that's all my resolution would allow.

So here is the problem now:

Now I have NO box at all. I have only the magnifying glass which has to be clicked on to open the choices.

When I click on the magnifying glass, it opens a window on my screen that is 10 1/2 inches long and 4 inches high. It also shades everything on the screen around the search box so that I can no longer look through the list and choose a message number to put in the box, because the box covers the message numbers and posts.

Worse yet, what little of the screen I can see through the shading behind, it won't even scroll to let me look at the page of messages. Or even to find a message number to choose to start a search using message numbers.

This just cannot work for me, please please put it back like it was on desktop. This is the worst thing I was afraid might happen. :(

Please please put it back.

Thanks Mark.

Brenda

Maria
 

There may be another benefit to taking the search by message # out of the search box and that's the problem with when you move your cursor from the search field to click the "search only within this thread" option and then you have to put the cursor back to enable the return/go.  As mentioned in message #9958.

It would be ideal to have a "search" button on that dialog box.

Also, when the search fields include more advanced options (by author, by subject, message content, by date) etc.. maybe the number field won't work there?

I see Y! has it as a stand alone search box. If you are searching by # it's because you actually know the message number - so while it's a search, it's kinda not the same type of search as it's more of a way to avoid clicking the page arrows to get back to a specific place. It's more of a direction/command than a search.

Maria


 

Hey,

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 02:33 am, Nightowl wrote:

I can no longer look through the list and choose a message number to put in the box, because the box covers the message numbers and posts.

I checked this out and at first I thought, oh yeah, this is a big problem. But then it dawned on me: so what if the msg# box covers up part of the screen, or if you can't scroll through the message list to find the message# you want while the box is up? The box seems to be specifically geared to the situation where you *remember* a specific message# and want to jump to it. If you can see on the screen the message and message# you're interested in, you don't need to use the msg# box because you can just click on the message. Right?

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

Maria,

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 05:37 am, HR Tech wrote:

If you are searching by # it's because you actually know the message number

Yes, posts crossing. I just posted the same fact. 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

Nightowl >8#
 

HR Tech wrote:>>There may be another benefit to taking the search by message # out of the search box and that's the problem with when you move your cursor from the search field to click the "search only within this thread" option and then you have to put the cursor back to enable the return/go.  As mentioned in message #9958.<<

Anything to get my message # box back where it was will help me.

Maria wrote:>> I see Y! has it as a stand alone search box. If you are searching by # it's because you actually know the message number - so while it's a search, it's kinda not the same type of search as it's more of a way to avoid clicking the page arrows to get back to a specific place. It's more of a direction/command than a search.<<

Yes, it's a direction command that I use to get several pages back or forward, especially when searching for something I do NOT know the number of. And it was so easy to scroll and change the number and scroll and change the number. Now I can't. :(

Catlady wrote:>>I checked this out and at first I thought, oh yeah, this is a big problem. But then it dawned on me: so what if the msg# box covers up part of the screen, or if you can't scroll through the message list to find the message# you want while the box is up?
The box seems to be specifically geared to the situation where you *remember* a specific message# and want to jump to it. If you can see on the screen the message and message# you're interested in, you don't need to use the msg# box because you can just click on the message. Right?<<

No. It's not because I actually always know the number. Often it's because I'm guessing at the number, and what I tended to do was scroll up and down and find a message that may or may not have been part of a thread I want to find and then guess how many numbers to go back or forward. Also, one of my problems is remembering numbers. I can remember words but not numbers.

I can't tell you how many times I started to put a number in the message# box only to have to scroll back down and double check it two or three times. So now I'd have to also write down numbers I'm searching on or numbers of posts I don't really want to keep it straight and work backwards...

I just want it back, I don't think that's all that much to ask. It was the single most important thing I used on here. That should count for something. I was so upset last night that I was crying and couldn't get to sleep.

Just hoping and praying that it will come back.

At least today anyway, I'm back in non-test mode and it's here for the time being...WHEW. I thought it was already pushed live to the site.

Brenda

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:48 am, Nightowl wrote:
I can remember words but not numbers.

This is how most human beings work, actually, which is why I can't understand why there has not been more of an outcry about improving the actual search functionality in Groups.io.  Message numbers are generally generated as a way of not running out of URLs.  This is the only forum where I've ever seen them "put on public display" as a search mechanism and used as a reference.

Here are screen shots of the searches from two other forums I frequent regularly.  The first is from an ancient forum software platform that's still being used, but is no longer supported:

and the second is from the advanced search of a more modern forum (which, by the way, allows you to choose the search shown, VB Search, or Google's internal site search):


The search mechanism on Groups.io is sorely in need of some major improvement, as it doesn't allow you the kind of tweaking of advanced searches typical in this sort of venue.  In the meantime, I've been using the site: operator of a web search engine for the URLs of the groups I need to search here so that I can specify enough to get the kind of narrowed results I'm generally looking for.

That improved mechanism could definitely include message number given that a number of users here have become very accustomed to using it instead of words or phrases, coupled with specific group(s), to do routine searching.

--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray

Nightowl >8#
 

Brian Vogel wrote:>>This is how most human beings work, actually, which is why I can't understand why there has not been more of an outcry about improving the actual search functionality in Groups.io.  Message numbers are generally generated as a way of not running out of URLs.<<

I had no idea most human beings couldn't remember numbers as well as they can remember words. You have actually made me feel better by saying that. I thought I was in the minority because I can't remember numbers, but I'm bad at math, as well.

Brian wrote:>>This is the only forum where I've ever seen them "put on public display" as a search mechanism and used as a reference.<<

Yahoo did it, and before that I used it on BBS's all the time. Word searches always turn up to be fraught with issues, even on the best search engine which at ONE point, was Yahoo. But the message numbers are sequential, and if I guess that April 2016 messages start at this point or that one, I can guess a number to put in, scroll, change it, scroll and change it until I get to the page I want.

I love writing, and little notepads, so writing the numbers I want to reply to has never been a problem. But now I would also have to write numbers to add to searching for the number sequences I want, OR open another window to scroll the message base in while numbering in another...the thought gives me a headache.

I never read by thread, I always read in chronological order, and the message# Box was the best thing to use for that. When Yahoo screwed everything up in groups, I searched all over for another forum that would allow me to read everything in chronological order or used message numbers I could navigate by.

This was the only one that did.

I'm just hoping I can get my Message Number Box back. It was the main thing on MY wishlist in a new platform, and I strove to get it in here in the first place. Now I need it to stay here.

Thanks Brian,

Brenda

Nightowl >8#
 

Thank you ALL for your support in this issue that's upsetting me so much.

I'll be gone awhile today, but I'm crossing my fingers that Mark will understand why the message # box is so important to me, and let it stay where it was. And I'm praying I don't have to wait for the answer all weekend, as this really has me stressed. :(

I'll catch up more when I get back.

Brenda

 

Brenda et al,

I have moved the Msg # text field out of the search dialog and onto the main page for the messages/single message pages, like before. I did the best I could with formatting it on mobile, but there's not much that can be done; unfortunately it pushes the page down, which is why I moved it into the dialog in the first place.

Do other people use the Msg # text field on a regular basis? I'm just wondering if there's another way we can solve this besides having that text field on the page.

This is live on the test version. Please check it out. I'll move the main site over to use the new version this afternoon.

Thanks,
Mark

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Nightowl <featheredleader@...> wrote:
Brian Vogel wrote:>>This is how most human beings work, actually, which is why I can't understand why there has not been more of an outcry about improving the actual search functionality in Groups.io.  Message numbers are generally generated as a way of not running out of URLs.<<

I had no idea most human beings couldn't remember numbers as well as they can remember words. You have actually made me feel better by saying that. I thought I was in the minority because I can't remember numbers, but I'm bad at math, as well.

Brian wrote:>>This is the only forum where I've ever seen them "put on public display" as a search mechanism and used as a reference.<<

Yahoo did it, and before that I used it on BBS's all the time. Word searches always turn up to be fraught with issues, even on the best search engine which at ONE point, was Yahoo. But the message numbers are sequential, and if I guess that April 2016 messages start at this point or that one, I can guess a number to put in, scroll, change it, scroll and change it until I get to the page I want.

I love writing, and little notepads, so writing the numbers I want to reply to has never been a problem. But now I would also have to write numbers to add to searching for the number sequences I want, OR open another window to scroll the message base in while numbering in another...the thought gives me a headache.

I never read by thread, I always read in chronological order, and the message# Box was the best thing to use for that. When Yahoo screwed everything up in groups, I searched all over for another forum that would allow me to read everything in chronological order or used message numbers I could navigate by.

This was the only one that did.

I'm just hoping I can get my Message Number Box back. It was the main thing on MY wishlist in a new platform, and I strove to get it in here in the first place. Now I need it to stay here.

Thanks Brian,

Brenda




 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:54 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Do other people use the Msg # text field on a regular basis? I'm just wondering if there's another way we can solve this besides having that text field on the page.

Mark,

In rethinking this, I actually rarely use the message#. I think I may use it once in awhile as a "citation" when I don't want to post or send an actual link, but that is rare. I think it's unimportant in the big scheme of things and I have no problem with it staying on the search page.

I am puzzled by the panic and stress over this. It seems like a relatively unimportant issue, even to me, who does favor the message # box being available. I personally don't feel any pain by its staying with the search box.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:32 am, Nightowl wrote:
I thought I was in the minority because I can't remember numbers

Numbers, as in just some random number (which a message number is, or the total on your lunch bill today is, or the like) are generally "mental ephemera" that are very hard to attach any external meaning to outside the quantity they denote.  The same is not true of words used in combination, which carry meaning in and of themselves.  For instance, I'll remember that you went by Feathered Leader and Nightowl probably for quite a while now because those two phrases are attached to this place and to you.  13568, even were that a message that you wrote, is not and, even if I did somehow attach that to you (or anyone else) it would be supplanted with some random number that comes next in life.   I can recall threads in multiple venues I participated in several years ago and am able to mentally pull up very specific phrases I can use for search string(s) for a great many of them.  Their content was important to me at the time they were active and I knew in the back of my head I was going to need that information in the future and where I could search to find it.  I also tend to remember the writing styles and turns of phrase of regulars in the venues I haunt, so that those can be used effectively at times as a results-narrowing criterion.

Your method of reading is absolutely antithetical to mine (and that's an observation of fact, not a value judgment).  I could no sooner plow through messages in chronological order on a very active group and keep switching between conversations/issues/discussions and keep any coherent mental thread.  The same is true for me in e-mail, where I always use a conversation view.

Chacun à son goût!
--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray

 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:48 am, Nightowl wrote:
I just want it back, I don't think that's all that much to ask. It was the single most important thing I used on here. That should count for something. I was so upset last night that I was crying and couldn't get to sleep.

 Me, I'm crying over search. I just want it to work. It gives me nightmares.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

On 15 Jul 2016 at 10:54, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Do other people use the Msg # text field on a regular basis?
I rarely use it, but have used it.


--
Jim
Poston@...

<< A man's got to know his limitations. >>

Maria
 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:54 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Do other people use the Msg # text field on a regular basis? I'm just wondering if there's another way we can solve this besides having that text field on the page.

I have no feelings either way where it is on desktop as there is plenty of space there. It looks fine where you put it. In the search box, out of the search box. It's all good.

On mobile, having the message # search box out (and a larger font) than the "messages view" hashtags" and magnifying glass icon, is an eyesore. If it were all on one line... but like that on it's own line, it's making my head tilt to the left. If it were smaller would it fit to the right of the search icon? On iphone 5's? I'm the kind of person who can't stand seeing a picture not level on a wall, or the horizon line in a photo not perfectly straight, so this is giving me that same queasiness. I'll live ;) but it's not ideal at all design wise which is a shame given the incredible attention to detail elsewhere. It almost dominates the top of the page now.

As to whether I personally use the message # box on a regular basis: No, I hardly ever use it unless someone says " look at message #.." which isn't something that happens in our Y! group ever ( people there just paste the link to the message). I think here on @beta is the first time I've started referring to messages by #, but only because the links to them don't look straightforward on groups.io when copy/pasted (again this is me reacting to visuals - i'd prefer something like groups.io/beta/message/# - but you get all the extra stuff), and because on mobile the insert link tool is tricky and on desktop I am often too rushed.

That said, message #'s are a very useful tool for our archivist who will create lists of message #'s for specific topics and can then search for them.  By no means am I against message #'s- especially when there is a messages view (very useful). They are very useful ways of referring to a message.

But no, I personally hardly ever search by message # and when i do, i know the specific # i am looking for and i was fine with them in the search box. 

But i totally get that it's upsetting to someone else who uses them in a different manner.

I just wish there were another way to solve this design wise as far as mobile is concerned.

Maria


Sue
 

>On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:54 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Do other people use the Msg # text field on a regular basis? I'm just wondering if there's another way we can solve this besides having that text field on the page.

 

I wouldn’t say I use it regularly, in fact it’s fairly rare these days but when I do, I use it in the same way Brenda described; to narrow down my search for a specific post when I can’t find it via a keyword search or can’t remember a keyword but have a vague idea of when it was posted. The other time I would use it, obviously, is to search for a particular message such as when Maria quoted a message number for Brenda to look at.

I’ve just tried doing a # search on both mobile and desktop and they both look and work fine for me.  I do take the point about the mobile possibly looking better if it were somehow on the same line but I’d rather keep it this way than do away with it altogether. But then I used it via mobile before this change and found that fine as well.

Clearly I’m easy to please – over this topic at least <g>

 

Sue

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:29 pm, Sue wrote:
but have a vague idea of when it was posted.

Which brings me back to my earlier point, and my plea:  Give us a search mechanism that reflects best in class.

Having a date range of some sort, and personally I prefer a "between" type search where you can specify the earliest and latest dates between which messages should be returned, is a basic requirement.  So is a search on author.  So would being able to specify whether one wants to search by title only or title and message text.

Having a search by group or groups selection would be very nice, and is very common, because there are often closely related groups on a site such as this and the user doing the search may know that the message being sought is most likely in groups A, B, and C.  

The search feature here is one of the absolutely weakest points of Groups.io.  It's also something that gets noticed right away if you are anything beyond the most casual of users.  It's just too simplistic and does not allow enough refinement in search criteria to adequately narrow results.  There are lots of examples out there to use as excellent examples to pattern after, too.

--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray

 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, HR Tech via Groups.io <m.conway11@...> wrote:

On mobile, having the message # search box out (and a larger font) than the "messages view" hashtags" and magnifying glass icon, is an eyesore. If it were all on one line... but like that on it's own line, it's making my head tilt to the left.

I wasn't happy with it either. I've removed the Msg # text box on mobile only.

Thanks,
Mark

Sue
 

>I wasn't happy with it either. I've removed the Msg # text box on mobile only.

 

So you have – with dizzying speed <g>  Having just said I would rarely use it, I would still prefer to have it via mobile so I hope this is still a work in progress until you can figure something acceptable to all.

 

Sue_._,_._,_