TheAnswerBank forum software

[LCDMAN]

Does anyone else think that TheAnswerBank forum software is a bit weak? No chance to edit your postings if you have a typo or similar (ok you can preview but who does?) No options for "advanced" posting with bold or italic text etc to emphasise a point of info. The fact that https links aren't supported as clickable links etc. etc.

It all seems a bit old hat, not to say naf. JMO.

[Ethel]

Could you imagine what would happen with the edit facility?

People would post the most foul, offensive posts and then edit them quickly.

We had the bold and italic and it was abused by some idiot who thought it was funny to turn the whole page bold and italic.

Clickable links do work here.

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/How-it-Works/Qu estion651730.html#top

[LCDMAN]

Thank Ethel, still seems a bit naf to me, but meh.

The "post some crap and then edit it quick" scenario doesn't happen on other, bigger, boards like DigitalSpy (which are perhaps aimed at, dare I say it, a less responsible demographic) and you can have bold, italics, smilies etc. for emphasis. Posts here at TAB look cold and clinical by comparison.

Edit is handy for correcting (or "editing") small mistakes or maybe adding a link, especially if it is a timed facility (as most are) in that you can edit for only 10 or 15 minutes after posting, not tomorrow or next week.

It's like working in DOS when windows is possible.

BTW Secure http {https} links don't get resolved as clickable here at TAB, only http ones do.

[Gromit]

No options for "advanced" posting with bold or italic text etc to emphasise a point of info. The fact that https links aren't supported as clickable links

They are and links are clickable

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/ABTutorial.html

[ChuckFickens]

I've seen several other forums where there is more text formatting available and lets users post smillies and other e-motion's and I think they are horrible. Overuse of them distracts from the actual content of the post and can make threads very hard to follow.

we can still do bold itallic and underlined and in my opinion that's enough for emphasis of any point

I do agree though that HTTPS links should resolve as clickable,

[Ethel]

I've seen forums with tags too, below each post.

Huge gifs that get downright annoying after the third viewing in a long post.

[ChuckFickens]

Also I dislike other forums that have an auto quote feature that gets hugely over used so you end up with one post that is four pages of quoting the answers you've already read followed by a one line "original" entry.

One of the things I do like about this site is the clear and uncluttered layout of it that make threads far easier to follow than most other sites I've seen.

[Ethel]

Oh yes, Chuck - I've seen that autoquote and hate it.

It is easy enough to quickly copy and paste a relevant part of a post when necessary

[saxy_jag]

I can see where you're coming from, Ethel, with the foul posts thing. I guess there are those who'd do that just to 'hit' the person they want to get before editing.

On the other hand, I'm sure most of us have fired off something in anger that we regret the moment we've hit the 'submit' button. To compound matters, we then see it every time we log on until a mod sees it, and even if we post to apologise, it's still there.

[VHG]

I go on to this site a lot http://www.hotukdeals.com/all/all/new

Although it is mostly for posting shopping deal it does allow people to post all sorts of questions as well so is similar to this site.

One of the really nice things about that site is the abiity to edit your post or add more to it which I find really useful.

[LCDMAN]

Thanks for all your answers, a few responses;

1. Gromit, you (along with some others), missed the "s" at the end of https, https links don't resolve to clickable here - http do (I know that, I've used them).

2. Some "idiot" buttons in the create post section would be useful for those not familiar with (or happy using) html tags to create bold or italic text - like I said, it's like using DOS instead of windows.

3. I agree that emoticons/smilies can get in the way, but otherwise have no strong feelings either way about them. Avatars can help people identify with other posters, just limit their size. (see 5. below)

4. I agree with Ethel, allowing images in posts is not a good idea. People can always link to their images on hosting sites if they want to.

5. What about a little more (optional) info below posters names (on the left), even basic stuff like a location or gender might help. How many reply posts do you see which either assume someones location or ask where they are??

6. A selective quote function, so that you can (if you wish) avoid any confusion about which post you are replying to. Not the horrid autoquote thing though, that just makes threads unreadable!!

It all feels a bit archaic and "clunky" but I note from the Editor's blog that a new version is being worked on at the moment.

I'd be happy with a 10 minute edit of my posts, I always want to change/add/correct something and it looks naf having to make another post.

[kempie]

"Idiot" buttons for text formatting were the norm for AB until the middle of 2006, when Rich Text Format was dropped as the method of posting - IIRC the reason cited was that RTF was not available to some non-IE browsers therefore it wasn't fair that some could change the appearance of posts while others could not (a cop out in my view).

If equality was truly the driving force of this site, the disparity between the ease of selecting text within posts using Firefox and lack thereof when using IE should also have been addressed.

[dzug]

The two things I find annoying are:

the sort order of posts where current questions can get buried pages down rather than fresh answers bringing them to the top

the absence of a usable search facility

[ChuckFickens]

dzug,

When viewing a topic look just below where you can type you own question in (at the top of the list of others questions)

where it says "most recently answered" if you click that is changes the sort order so the most recently are at the top.

But your right about the search function being crap.

[gen2]

dzug,

Different sections have different requirements.

In Quizzes & Puzzles, a question that already has an answer is of no further interest and can quite happily move down the page until it falls off the bottom. It is the unanswered ones that should be at the top, but therre is a button for that too - 'All Unanswered'.

For those of us confined to Q&P, the current system works well.