Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SI Beta Site Launch - 7/01/99 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbe who wrote (1126)	7/31/1999 9:39:00 PM
From: John Biddle	Respond to of 2340

In one instance, you are actually talking about restoring a feature that Classic SI already has, and that the New SI has unaccountably jettisoned. Yes I know it is an existing feature and have used it, though only once. I was focused on gaining PM parity with SMs rather than restoration of a previously existing feature. What I would like to see is not only the restoration of that function (which is exactly analogous to the "search this thread" function on SM that was restored), but also a search capability going back further than 120 days. Frankly, I'd like to see it go all the way back to the beginning -- of the thread or of the individual poster's posts. I agree completely. I didn't want to be too long on this post and wanted to keep from going on & on about any one thing. I thought when I said that I wanted PeopleMarks to work exactly like SubjectMarks do that I was clear enough. Guess not. I see no reason why searching on a person should be different than searching on a thread, including the ability to go all the way back to that person's first post. When I said: In SM you can jump from one subject message to the next message within that subject. Why not do the same within PM and jump from one message by a person to the next message by that person? I meant that when in PeopleMarks, looking at a post from a person, the "Next" button should take you to that person's next message, analogous to the way the "Next" button in SubjectMarks takes you to the next message in that subject. I would really like a checkbox, which my Eudora e-mail is equipped with, and which I use to "grade" the Listserve materials I archive. I have quite a few years of backfiled materials. So the checkbox makes it easy for me to find the really important stuff when I need to. HOWEVER.... personally, I would rather check off what I think is important. I do not necessarily agree with other people's ratings. Besides, sometimes a great post is posted at a bad time of day, or on an off day, and so doesn't get flagged. Sometimes it is over the other posters' heads. And so forth. The system you describe sounds a little too mechanical to me. The highest number of hits does not necessarily equal the highest value. As a matter of fact, insulting & nasty posts get hit a lot. Would that make them of High Value? :-)) First, when I said "hits" I didn't mean views of a message, I meant checks in the "High Value" box. In hindsight, "hits" was clearly the wrong word for what I wanted to convey. I wouldn't want to measure the value of anything by how many people saw it, but how many people said it was good may be a useful thing, before you have time to make up your own mind. I like your variation, wherein the reader flags high value posts for themselves as an easy way to get back to them. Different benefit from mine but maybe a bigger benefit. Maybe one box can serve both purposes. Each of us could have the ability to turn on "our" HV filter to see our own subset of posts, or we could turn on the "thread's" HV filter to help catch up with unread stuff or to skim for the future if you preferred to see a subset of posts on many threads as opposed to all posts of a few.