Page length

[GuinivereElise]

Assuming that in the future there will be a "take me to the latest post" feature (which I would like as well), does 30 (or 33) seem like a good number for page length?

~Spanky

Salt makes everything taste better...

that works. and, RG, that USED to work for me, but hasn't, since eplay came back up. perhaps that's a bug??

(I don't think salt makes jello taste better...)

[Captain Fuckwit]

Choice of 10, 20, 50 or 100, with reverse sort by date & author as an option.

Until a point in time when page length is determined via User's Preferences, the default length of posts per page should be a number which is easy to multiply, add to, or subtract from. Currently, in any thread with several hundred messages, a user can jump forward or back by changing the start= number in the URL: (You may need to know how to write the url yourself if PhPBBS isn't immediately providing a proper fill in when you open that thread.)

e.g. 30, 60, 90, 120 or 20, 40, 60, 80 or 25, 50, 75, 100 or 15, 30, 45, 60

As an example, in the Empire Store thread, which has several pages, the user can 'page' forward or back by changing the start= # to 20, 25, 30, 42, 11, whathaveyou. However, this trick is not so obvious to a new user when the default page length is an odd-ball number like 42 or 11. Something like 30, 60, 90 in the url is easier to recognize as a pagination scheme. My recommendation is 30 because it is easy to multiply, add to and subtract from and it can also be halved by 15, making a half-jump forward to start=45 or half-jump back to start=15. If 30 is too long, let's try 20 (or even the original default of 15) for the default length, for the same reasons.

(Empire Store)
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... c&start=20

Agree. I especailly like the idea of the reverse order viewing.

The page can be displayed in descending order by changing the postorder= from 'asc' to 'dsc'. Give it a try on this page here in this forum-

(Page length)
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0

Hope this helps!
Courtesy of Captain Fuckwit

[spanky]

that USED to work for me, but hasn't, since eplay came back up. perhaps that's a bug??

That's not working? It works for me. Please double check and let me know.

There's also a very-hard-to-notice identifier that could be helpful when you do RG's trick: At the top of each post, there's a datestamp like so:

Code: Select all

Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:28 pm

To the left of that is a little page icon. Take special note of when it is white and when it is yellow.

~Spanky

[spanky]

If 30 is too long, let's try 20 (or even the original default of 15) for the default length, for the same reasons.

Thanks Cap'n Fuckwit!

What do people think? This makes good sense to me. Should we move to 30 and see how that goes for a few days? If it feels too long, we can go to 20. I felt that 15 was too short. Ideally a user should be able to set it themselves, but refer to my "frying fish" post found elsewhere

Feedback please!

~Spanky

[GuinivereElise]

lets try 30 and see how it goes.

re: last post. my fault. i wasn't waiting long enough. when I click on the little icon next to the last poster's name, it takes me to the beginning of the thread until it loads fully, then forwards me to the end. I just have to be patient (I hate being patient!).

no worries, Spanky. thanks for your help!

[bullD]

yes, 30, please.

[Badger]

There has been an offline (direct email to me) suggestion that we use a round number (like 20 or 30). 27

And just what is wrong with prime numbers?

[Wind_Borne]

Or Fibonacci Numbers?

[Wind_Borne]

Or 17. It's the most random number, you know.

[helitack]

How about 24, like in a case of PBR.

[Vego]

Clickin' around I think 27 would be better than 30. I'm finding vertigo sets in about post 30-31 and I have to scroll real fast to the top or bottom to get my bearings... 'course it could be the ale as well, aye

[Tancorix]

I'm still partial to 33 and the poll results seem to show others agree. With lower numbers it drove up the page counts to some high numbers that could be a turnoff for new people to wade through.

Q: Is there a server performance benefit to having high or low page lengths? If we could get faster load times by having the page count set at a certain level why not let that be the deciding factor? Would it help on searching for content to have shorter or longer pages?

[Captain Fuckwit]

I am revising my page length recommendation to 20 posts per page.

Try This:
•Open page 1 of this thread Page length in its own window
•Scroll to the top
•Scroll back down (either with a scroll wheel or down-arrow)
•Count white backgrounds as you scroll down
•When you've counted ten white backgrounds, stop scrolling
•With a last fine adjustment, the scroll-thumb on the scroll bar now approximately marks where 20 messages ends
•Use whatever floating pallete that your system avails you of, a palette that appears "above" your browser such as an application switcher
•Line up the top of the palatte with where the scroll-thumb is at on the scroll bar to mark where 20 messages ends
•Now freely scroll up and down to get a feel for what a 20 message page looks like, while never moving the scroll-thumb down past where the palette marks 20 posts
•If you don't have a palette available, try using a Post-it-note™ on the side of your monitor

Considering page load time (broadband) and/or versus readability, 20 messages as the default length is do-able. Do it now. We already know what 15 looks like and we can later bump it past 20 instead of this mad hopping around. I've provided an explanation for round numbers. Reward message clarity: Make the change now. Then let the banter continue until another user presents a decent argument for a better page length. Labor now, and you probably won't have to labor again for some time. Let's roll!

Glad to be of help!
Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit

[theCryptofishist]

but refer to my "frying fish" post found elsewhere

No, I refuse.

[spanky]

Is there a way to limit the size of any posted images similar to the avatar size limits? The large images and side to side scrolling are a major pain. Or if nothing else post a recommended size guide so we can scale down our images ahead of time or something.

Avatars are limited (I believe) to 70000bytes, 80x80px. I am looking at a width-enforcing-MOD to help with long URLs and wide images. I'm gonna split this topic to discuss this topic apart from length, which seems to be lively.

Page width: http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic.php?t=8299

~Spanky

[PurpleKoosh]

:headdesk:

I've been in the habit of clicking the itty-bitty page to the left of the thread title to bring me to the newest posts in the thread. All of a sudden, clicking on it brings me to what was the newest post the first time I logged in for the day, no matter how many other posts I've already read since then. And yes, I'm waiting for the page to load fully.

Wassupwitdat?

[Tancorix]

My wheel mouse and those scroll bars are certainly getting a workout with the new designs. I wonder what Bob would think about this with his minimalistic approach to this stuff?

[spanky]

All of a sudden, clicking on it brings me to what was the newest post the first time I logged in for the day, no matter how many other posts I've already read since then.

Yes I have seen this. I am looking into it.

~Spanky

[spanky]

I reset the poll to 20/30 posts per page and the current number of posts per page to an round number of 30.

~Spanky

[actiongrl]

Well, I kinda *liked* the inscrutable nature of the 33 posts per page idea, but perhaps I am Old And Fond Of Recalling Vinyl LP's.

Since I wouldn't be one to monkey with the URL to change the number of posts I see, I guess that's the solution that adds up in geekspeak, but other than that I don't see a difference between 30 and 33 and I can live with whatever. As long as there aren't images in a thread I would rather there are 100 posts per page, but I'm on a cable connection, and at least I can set my own prefs.

FWIW I rillyrillyrillyrilly want to see the mod that will take me to the last post I read, like the old-old ePlaya did. Let's see...DO IT NOW! *blushes and blinks coyly at Spanky*

[GuinivereElise]

Let's see...DO IT NOW! *blushes and blinks coyly at Spanky*

Holy shit, does this work??

In that case, I wholeheartedly agree with AG...

please please PLEEEEEEEESE???

*batting eyelashes and shimmying shoulders a bit*

[theCryptofishist]

Well, I kinda *liked* the inscrutable nature of the 33 posts per page idea, but perhaps I am Old And Fond Of Recalling Vinyl LP's

Me too. But if we are going for a "round number" I'd actually go for 25 as 4 x 25 = 100. That makes using the url, on those occasions when I do, easier to figure in my head. (Question: When we bring back some of the old eplaya will within board links still work?)

[theCryptofishist]

All of a sudden, clicking on it brings me to what was the newest post the first time I logged in for the day, no matter how many other posts I've already read since then.

Do you mean that when you pressed that icon you went to the newest unread post? I always ended up at the newest post at the time that I logged in last. (If that isn't clear let me know--just started the morning latte.)

[spanky]

Question: When we bring back some of the old eplaya will within board links still work?

Hmmm, good question!

~Spanky

[PurpleKoosh]

All of a sudden, clicking on it brings me to what was the newest post the first time I logged in for the day, no matter how many other posts I've already read since then.

Do you mean that when you pressed that icon you went to the newest unread post?

Yep....

[spectabillis]

Longer allows me to scan through what is relevant and not, just my opinion, longer.

[spanky]

All of a sudden, clicking on it brings me to what was the newest post the first time I logged in for the day, no matter how many other posts I've already read since then.

Do you mean that when you pressed that icon you went to the newest unread post?

Yep....

Yeah, this seemes borken to me. I'll look into it. The one on the left should take you to the last post you read, and the one on the right should take you to the most recent post.

More forums first though!!

~Spanky

[III]

""brings me to what was the newest post the first time I logged in for the day, no matter how many other posts I've already read since then.""

this is how all phpbb boards have worked as long as i've used them.

it's a pain in the butt.

[III]

>pain in the butt

so is not being able to edit your posts, btw. i realize that the ptb think it's a good idea, even though they reserve (and make use of) the ability themselves, but to me it strikes of inconveniencing the majority in order to prevent what would actually be a fleeting offense by a very small minority.

i urge you to reconsider the editing thing.