Why aren't posts numbered within a thread?

[Morgin]

This thread is a good reminder of the diversity of users. I haven’t thought about post numbers in decades. Would never have thought some people are so passionate about this topic. Certainly a curiosity to me as to why people are so hung up on them, but that’s what makes this community interesting!

[BankFodder]

You are absolutely right to recognise that there is a diversity of users. As a forum administrator I definitely don't want to impose a way of doing things on our users. As far as I'm concerned they are entitled to make their own choices that we need Invision support behind us to allow this to happen.

I don't know about people being "hung up" about them. It's simply that some people find them useful – and others don't but it's their choice

On 9/6/2020 at 4:20 PM, Mr 13 said:

For IPS 4.4, changed this:

<li><a class='ipsType_blendLinks' href='{$comment->item()->url()->setQueryString( array( 'do' => 'findComment', 'comment' => $comment->$idField ) )}' data-ipsTooltip title='{lang="share_this_post"}' data-ipsMenu data-ipsMenu-closeOnClick='false' id='elSharePost_{$comment->$idField}' data-role='shareComment'><i class='fa fa-share-alt'></i></a></li>

to this:

<li><a class='ipsType_blendLinks' href='{$comment->item()->url()->setQueryString( array( 'do' => 'findComment', 'comment' => $comment->$idField ) )}' data-ipsTooltip title='{lang="share_this_post"}' data-ipsMenu data-ipsMenu-closeOnClick='false' id='elSharePost_{$comment->$idField}' data-role='shareComment'>#{$comment->$idField} <i class='fa fa-share-alt'></i></a></li>

In this template:

This certainly seems to offer one solution – and we will probably try it. However, for ordinary people who aren't necessarily particularly computer-confident, they may find it a bit geeky and a simple plug-in to produce the post numbers would be very handy.

There was a plug-in available for the previous version of Invision. I'm hoping that somebody will produce a new one

Edited September 11, 2020 by BankFodder

[Malwarebytes Forums]

Yes, the code provided by Mr 13 does in fact work @BankFodder . We have implemented it on our forums. I do agree though that making it an option or available to Administrators from within the ACP would be nice. Thank you @Mr 13

Regardless of how one views it Visual cues are sensory cues received by the eye that many people process and understand better than text or menus. 

Referencing a post or ID# seen onscreen without having to copy or quote and paste it would help reduce clutter as well as I would find it difficult to believe that making a handicapped person perform an additional 3 or 4 more clicks to obtain or reference the same thing would meet muster for the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) 

Designing Software that is Accessible to Individuals with Disabilities
https://www.washington.edu/doit/designing-software-accessible-individuals-disabilities
 

[BankFodder]

Thanks for this, @Malwarebytes Forums. It hadn't crossed my mind about the effect on disabled persons, but of course you are right. Of course it's a shame that one needs to fall back on legal requirements – when I think that a far more customer-facing approach by Invision would be simply to facilitate client choice as part of their mission.

The support function with Invision is excellent but the software architecture function I find to be rather prescriptive and I don't think it's necessary

[RocketStang]

17 hours ago, Malwarebytes Forums said:

Yes, the code provided by Mr 13 does in fact work @BankFodder . We have implemented it on our forums. I do agree though that making it an option or available to Administrators from within the ACP would be nice. Thank you @Mr 13

Regardless of how one views it Visual cues are sensory cues received by the eye that many people process and understand better than text or menus. 

Referencing a post or ID# seen onscreen without having to copy or quote and paste it would help reduce clutter as well as I would find it difficult to believe that making a handicapped person perform an additional 3 or 4 more clicks to obtain or reference the same thing would meet muster for the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) 

Designing Software that is Accessible to Individuals with Disabilities
https://www.washington.edu/doit/designing-software-accessible-individuals-disabilities
 

Good points!  No disrespect to the devs...they are doing an awesome job!  But sometimes it is easy to over think stuff!  I have found that my members don't like to click and search for stuff...it is extra work now for them to look for the edit button or report button.  Sometimes visual clutter can be more efficient...LOL!

Edited September 10, 2020 by RocketStang

[BankFodder]

And the amount of "visual clutter" is really quite minuscule.

I have a sense that the software architects have made a decision and prefer not to make a U-turn.

 

[Rikki]

17 hours ago, Malwarebytes Forums said:

Yes, the code provided by Mr 13 does in fact work @BankFodder . We have implemented it on our forums. I do agree though that making it an option or available to Administrators from within the ACP would be nice. Thank you @Mr 13

Regardless of how one views it Visual cues are sensory cues received by the eye that many people process and understand better than text or menus. 

Referencing a post or ID# seen onscreen without having to copy or quote and paste it would help reduce clutter as well as I would find it difficult to believe that making a handicapped person perform an additional 3 or 4 more clicks to obtain or reference the same thing would meet muster for the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) 

Designing Software that is Accessible to Individuals with Disabilities
https://www.washington.edu/doit/designing-software-accessible-individuals-disabilities
 

The date in every post provides a direct permalink to the post. Incorrect post numbers based on a user's individual permissions would certainly present more of a usability issue for both disabled and able-bodied users.

It's absolutely fine that some people would like to have post numbers back - we understand people don't always like change - but please let's not try and justify it as being a legal requirement.

[BankFodder]

Let's hope that the developer who produced the excellent post number plug-in for the previous version comes up with modifications which make it work in the new version.

Then we will have choice and everybody will be happy.

I don't see what problem Invision have with customer choice

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

I don't see what problem Invision have with customer choice

Not a thing.

However, we have to be mindful of adding settings for minor things like this as each setting accrues technical debt.

[Rikki]

1 minute ago, BankFodder said:

I don't see what problem Invision have with customer choice

We have no problem with choices - that's why we have thousands of choices in the AdminCP. But every choice, no matter how small it may seem, has a cost in terms of development time, future maintenance, documentation, UI complexity and so on. And that's not even counting the problems with the feature that we've already outlined, specifically that they aren't the same for all users and therefore cannot be relied upon in the way you want them to be.

[BankFodder]

I take it that's a No, then.

[Matt]

We removed post numbers about 5 years ago and although we get the odd request here and there, it’s not something that is raised very often.

[Malwarebytes Forums]

On 9/10/2020 at 7:49 AM, Rikki said:

The date in every post provides a direct permalink to the post.

 

It's absolutely fine that some people would like to have post numbers back - we understand people don't always like change - but please let's not try and justify it as being a legal requirement.

No one said or tried to say it was a legal requirement (though it really is for Federal institutions, they cannot use software that does not follow certain ADA requirements by a Federally mandated law) that is not and was not the point. I have a handicapped adult child so I'm aware of how difficult many software applications are. Not trying to say the program needs massive changes to support ADA.

My point is/was that the ID tag number being shown @Mr 13 does in fact (in my opinion) provide the exact same purpose of a visual cue that post # have/had in the past. I've manually edited our forums to show it. All I'm providing is FEEDBACK which is the purpose of this forum. It would be very nice if allowing this to be shown by some setting within the ACP so that users did not need to manually edit their code.

As for the date in every post providing a permalink I'm sorry you just don't seem to understand what people are talking about. VISUAL cue just like I created all uppercase. You don't have to copy anything, you don't have to click a special button. You easily see there is something. Telling someone go find post where the date says Posted August 13 does nothing for anyone as there could be several posts made on that date. Why people are complaining it is a PITA to have to now copy and paste a special link to refer to. 

In my example here

I can tell the user to check out post ID 393 and most people can very easily find that number in the topic thread. I didn't have to copy, quote, or paste anything. 

If you don't wish to add such a feature that is your choice but to tell people they don't need it is YOUR personal opinion which may or may not be shared by others.

 

 

[sound]

5 hours ago, Malwarebytes Forums said:

 

I can tell the user to check out post ID 393 and most people can very easily find that number in the topic thread. I didn't have to copy, quote, or paste anything. 

If you don't wish to add such a feature that is your choice but to tell people they don't need it is YOUR personal opinion which may or may not be shared by others.

 

 

 

All seems very unwieldy this messing about with numbers

Would it not be quicker/effective if you as an admin just simply sent them a link to the comment/post, rather than asking an average forum user to scan thru what could be up to say 50 posts, looking for what may be an unconnected number, say 23781896.

What happens when there's more than one page of topics, and how easy would it be finding this number on mobile/tablets.

All a bit unwieldy to me, and so the return of this feature is not really something that I would like to see invision deploy development resources on, maybe better suited for a plug-in request?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by sound

[BankFodder]

If it is simply included as an option, then there is absolutely no reason why it should bother anyone who doesn't want to use it or that it would get in their way.

I don't see what the problem is with choice.

The people in favour of post numbers are simply advocating choice. In other words we are proposing a facility which will satisfy you if you don't want it – and would satisfy us who do want it.

The approach of the nay-sayers is simply to say "we don't think it's useful – so we don't think anyone else should have it".

Edited September 12, 2020 by BankFodder

[Malwarebytes Forums]

19 minutes ago, sound said:

What happens when there's more than one page of topics, and how easy would it be finding this number on mobile/tablets.

 

To be honest I rarely use a 6" screen phone except in an emergency. Using a phone to read, make, use posts is very slow and not productive at all for me. I would much rather use my 32" 4K monitor to do work. 

We have a few topics with over a couple hundred pages and it is extremely easy to reference the ID 393 in that topic and if you cannot find it then you're probably already challenged using a forum. 

As I also said, it is their choice to add it or not. But it's not like they need to add a lot of code (the code to do it was already provided). Now its just a matter if they want to do it or not. Based on replies so far it sounds like they have zero desire to add it either which is okay, I have it working already.

 

@BankFodder I'm new here but dear God if this is the normal feedback expected I cannot fathom how one gets more advanced help here. I suppose if you want real help beyond some basics it would seem you may need to hire a professional to assist you and simply stop visiting here. Very  disappointing when people even reading what you've posted don't understand what you're even talking about. Myself I'm glad that @Mr 13 came along and posted how he did it.

 

 

 

[sound]

30 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

If it is simply included as an option, then there is obscene no reason why it should bother anyone who doesn't want to use it or that it would get in their way.

I don't see what the problem is with choice.

The people in favour of post numbers are simply advocating choice. In other words we are proposing a facility which will satisfy you if you don't want it – and would satisfy us who do want it.

The approach of the nay-sayers is simply to say "we don't think it's useful – so we don't think anyone else should have it".

 

 

 

Ok, understand if it was a workable choice, but what if you feel it's a flawed choice? or maybe feel it's a backward step?

After all we are talking about carrying out forum admin tasks by manually quoting lengthy numbers, rather than using modern purpose built in features

As said, do feel it's better suited for a plug in...  imo.

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by sound

[BankFodder]

The previous post number plug-in which now doesn't work with the new version of Invision, was perfectly adequate to our needs. Anything on top of that would be a bonus.

It was a plug-in so there was a choice for the nay-sayers not to install it, and there was a choice for the rest of us to install it.

I'm not sure what's wrong with that

[Malwarebytes Forums]

12 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

The previous post number plug-in which now doesn't work with the new version of Invision, was perfectly adequate to our needs. Anything on top of that would be a bonus.

It was a plug-in so there was a choice for the nay-sayers not to install it, and there was a choice for the rest of us to install it.

I'm not sure what's wrong with that

I can understand not wanting to use or support static post number @BankFodder  as I used that plugin too but we did have several users complain because we told them to review certain post numbers from memorized posts but it turns out that due to spammers, edits, moves, etc. that the post number was not accurate. By using this ID: number regardless of what happens to the post the numbering won't get messed up. It might not be in the topic thread anymore but you cannot reference an invalid post number which is what we have had happen quite a few times. But we do run a support site not a general purpose site so we do have a lot of mods, editing, moving, etc.

Supporting the ability to Enable / Disable showing the ID: on the post from with the ACP would be nice, but it looks like that is not going to happen anytime soon.

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by Malwarebytes Forums
updated information

[BankFodder]

As I said, the previous plug-in worked perfectly well for us. We had no complaints.

But I agree with you, it doesn't look as if it's going to happen any time soon. The Invision team seems dead set against it

[BankFodder]

Just to add, there are references here from various people to – a number of complaints been received – or complaints being received from several people. Of course that leaves the thousands of other people who haven't complaints – either because they find that it is useful or because it simply doesn't bother them at all.

On our forum we have had no complaints out of 400,000 people.

[BankFodder]

Also, to add to this conversation – which apart from the other reasons seems to be suggesting that it's not useful and that people complain et cetera, I've noticed that the plug-in which now doesn't work on the new version of Invision had 659 downloads.

by the standards of any third party plug-in or application in the marketplace – this is a huge amount. I can imagine that the number of people who have complained or the number of Invision software architects who have decided that posts numbers must not be available, pales into insignificance against the 659 downloads which presumably have been made by forum administrators and their probably hundreds of thousands (and maybe millions) of forum members who are seeing this "visual clutter" every time they are browsing their respective forums and have no problem with focusing on content.

Go figure.

[Lindy]

I'm sorry it's felt that we were dismissive and it's never our intent to insult anyone who are trying to provide us heartfelt feedback. Admittedly, I think our frustration with demands for legacy functionality does bleed through on occasion, for which I apologize. It is taxing at times when you are moving forward, the vast majority of your clients are happy, but there's the occasional desire to pull us backwards and believe me, cluttering up the interface with inconsequential numbers, is by ALL modern web standards - a step backwards.

I know it sometimes feels like we make decisions in a vacuum and without regard to clients, because you are the client that feels passionately about a given issue - it IS an issue to you and we get and expect that. Nonetheless, I sometimes wish some of you had the vantage point of being in our office and on our internal systems in which we gather collective feedback from various avenues, technician notes, sales notes and see the exhaustive vetting that goes into something. You would see that this, for example, was removed because:

1) It's 2020 - post 390 right now, may not be 390 5 minutes from now or may not even be 390 right now to another user.

2) There are legacy forum platforms that have grown to be quite successful in maintaining legacy functions for a niche demographic and that's great for them, but we our goal is not at all to compete with legacy forum platforms. Consider us the FedEx of Communities: Moving Foward. 😉 We are a modern community platform and very respectfully, there isn't anything modern social related that uses arbitrary, visual IDs. I can't imagine you would tell a colleague "Hey Bob, check out tweet 9832441068311 on Tim's twitter feed" - nobody does that, right? 🙂 You send a link to the tweet and save Bob 10 minutes of needing to energize the flux capacitor to find content. Same with Facebook, Instagram, Reddit and other platforms the majority of customers and their end users are going to be familiar with.

3) Because, as noted in #2, it's inconsistent with literally the rest of the Internet, it caused confusion. "How do I remove this?" "Why is this here?" etc. It all prompted the question "why IS this here? it serves no functional purpose beyond familiarity and personally speaking, I would be extremely annoyed if someone sent me an arbitrary ID number for content I'm suppose to find myself when they could literally click the date of the post and send me the link to it.

I realize it used to exist and at one point, it was a good idea. Hand cranking an old Model A was also a good idea too before electric starters. I think we can mostly agree ehhh, maybe we'd rather just jump in and turn a key and/or push a button. Likewise, most agree they don't need an arbitrary number as a visual cue or as directions to a post - that's not how the 2020 Internet works. Simply click, copy and paste the link. Bob thanks you in advance.

@BankFodder I could see how that number could be misleading. I just looked, as I was curious too, but there are folks who have downloaded i 10+ times and it counts each one. This is the number of reporting installations that have ever had the plugin:

[BankFodder]

Thanks for this.

 

However, you haven't explained how depriving your clients of Choice is not compatible with a modern forward-looking approach.

Also, let me ask you this:  If a developer comes along and puts a new post-number plugin on the Marketplace, will you prevent it?

[The Old Man]

5 hours ago, BankFodder said:

Also, let me ask you this:  If a developer comes along and puts a new post-number plugin on the Marketplace, will you prevent it?

Well the new Marketplace has this requirement:

Quote

1.4. Your resource must not replicate any functionality that already exists in Invision Community or re-introduce functionality that has been removed, excluding inconsequential cosmetic changes that require no backend changes.

I don't know if anyone would want to take the risk of re-introducing the original post ID. The MP is a fairly scary and off-putting place these days, and whilst there's not exactly an "Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here" sign above the gate and it's done with the best of intentions, it comes across loud and clear that there are clear penalties for those going repeatedly against the corporate grain that could quickly affect their livelihood.

I actually never knew you could click on the post date, there's no indicator that it is clickable a bit like that dot in the topic list, but the ability to reference a post via the share link works great, no lengthy post id to remember, just a dynamic link or embedded rich link (a member's choice) that means it doesn't matter if the ID changes or the post moved, they will always get there by clicking on it.
 

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by The Old Man