There's always something to forget

[Tage]

So, thanks to the author of the Ars Magica article, I discovered that I left out a field in one of our database tables. This means that any guest articles submitted since we added the "meta" field to articles got sent to the black hole of the internet.

Since most articles are written by admins and department heads, we never noticed this until now.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Does this mean that MY name will actually appear on the articles "posted" byline?

Or can you still not be arsed to fix that?

[Fellfrosch]

No, this won't affect that. The only way to fix that is for me to go back through the archive and change them all...this is something I've been meaning to do but never get around to.

[Gemm: Rock & Roll Star; Born to Rock]

And we all know "that" will happen sometime soon.

[Spriggan]

I actualy complained about the submit form about 4-5 months ago and you said it was an ISP problem  

I was acutaly going to change the submitted by names when we switched to the new Website but figured that they were that way for a reason.  But If you want I can probaly do some next week.

[Tage]

Your name appears on articles if you post them. If you send them to Dan and he posts them, he needs to remember to change the poster name. That's not something I can fix.

[Fellfrosch]

I went through the entire RPG archive, and only found one article that was attributed incorrectly. It is fixed now, and I hope that Saint Ehlers may now return to his fitful, paranoid rest.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

"What we have here is... failure to communicate."

I'm talking about the "posted by Fellfrosch" line on the front page. Which is kind of silly. Who cares who posted it if he didn't write it? Yes I know /. does it, but /. does a lot of stupid things that I hate. When I see n article, I want to know who wrote it, not the admin who cleared it for publication.

[Fellfrosch]

Are you talking about the news items on the home page?

[Fellfrosch]

Okay, I think I get this now. When you referred to the "article byline" in your above post, you were actually talking about the news blurbs on the front page, which are wholly unrelated to articles and bylines in terms of website programming. That might be the root of our miscommunication.

[Spriggan]

Basicaly that's Just deals with who posted the Blurb (which only Fell,Tage and EUOL can do), not who posted the article.  It's that was for a reason sence That allows Fell to space out postings.  It would be silly if any of us could do that then there would be like 10 articles on one day and nothing the rest of the week.  The important thing is that in the article it's self it says who wrote it, not who posted the blurb about the article

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

actually, i referred to the article's "posted" byline, and I specifically put "posted" in "quotes" ("like this") so you would know that I meant the "posted by" statement.

And doesn't that sort of information seem a bit useless on the front page? I'd much rather see the author, because there are certain authors I'd rather not read, and it's a pain to go to the page and scroll down rather than just skip the whole process.

It's not necessarily about credit, I know I have my name on my articles. It's about useability and usefulness. "Posted by Fellfrosch" isn't helpful. "Written by blahblahblah" is.

[Spriggan]

From how Tage has it set up he'd have to recode the whole blurb function.  There are also blurbs in each section but I think I'm the only one who ever uses them for anyting besides articles.  Fell ads each blurb indepently, they are no way linked to a specific article.  He then adds the HTML to link to the article.  So to do so Fell would have to either add the words in himseld or as I said above Tage would have to change how things work.  But if you can convince him to do it more power to you.

[Fellfrosch]

I think it's safe to say that putting certain words in quotes did not succeed in conveying your meaning to anyone.

Now that we finally understand what's going on, though, it's someting worth thinking about.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

"I'll" "try" "to" "elaborate" "more" "next" "time."

(Punctuation, is. fun!)

Now, I hope no one takes this the wrong way, because I'm not trying to be critical, just observational. The editor says "we'll think about it" while the coder says "These are the difficulties involved." Interesting human nature insight. While the editor's comment seems more accepting, it actually doesn't commit to anything. However, the coder, while appearing negative, demonstrates that he already IS thinking about it and understands the scope of the task. Dunno. Just me. Game on.