Home Forums FineTunedMac Community FineTunedMac Feedback e-mail responses?

Is there any way to restore the old preference to get e-mail responses to *only* my own posts rather than to every post in a thread?

I'd certainly be grateful for it.

Not AFAICT.

I wouldn't mind having that as an option, but I'd absolutely want to keep the current one too. Only getting email responses to my own posts never made much sense to me; if I'm following a thread I'm interested in any replies to it. Moreover, IMO the current system is better for those looking for help since they'll get notification even if replies aren't made directly to their own posts.

And then of course there is the phenomenon that many users tend to click the reply button of the last post in a thread, regardless of which post they intend to reply to. If yours is not the last post, you'd not get notified of those replies. Likewise, if yours is, you'd get replies intended for previous posts as well... Confused?

Well, the New Reply button is at the top, whereas it belongs at the bottom. If there was such a button at MFI, I never noticed it - since I was at the bottom when I wanted to Reply, perhaps. I noticed it here because of the fact that I was in lots of threads very early. Back at MFI, I was annoyed by being "forced" to pick a post to reply to when I just had a general comment or a new line of discussion to put out there.

This version of UBB.threads has a reply button at the bottom of every post—which allows you to choose any post in the thread to reply to—and a reply button at the top of the thread, which allows you to reply to the original post.

This is exactly the same functionality that we had with the somewhat earlier version of UBB.threads that was in use at the MacFixIt Forums.

In any bulletin board software which supports a "threaded" mode, every post must in fact be a reply to some particular previous post; there's no way to reply generally to the thread, although replying to the original post might be considered a rough equivalent in some cases.

So what's the upside to "threaded" mode? In other forums, I just hit Reply. I don't have to indicate who I'm replying to. Why should I? That's what Quote is for.

The other thing that's missing here (and was not present at MFI) is the Quote + function, unless I'm missing something. :losemarbles: (ah those descriptive smilies at ***********.net!)

Without intending to tell you how to use this software, no, that's not what Quote is for, although you could use it to that effect. The top line of each post starting with "Re: Username" indicates whom you're replying to; you can click that Username to see exactly which post was replied to. You select that the way DK outlined.

The quote option allows you to focus on a specific part of the post you're responding to. To someone who expects such a focus, quoting an entire post is superfluous and confusing. The threaded mode allows you to focus on a specific post, and to link to it directly.

To the extent that some threads can be likened to discussions, wouldn't it be odd, in normal conversation, to have to indicate to whom you were talking by parroting their words back at them before being able to express your own thoughts? In normal conversation, you turn and make eye contact with the person at whom your expression is directed. Think of a reply to a specific poster as the online equivalent of that.

The fact is, most of the long-time MFIF members who are here at FTM are very familiar with this style of posting, and in any event, we're using UBB.threads software and are unlikely to switch any time soon, so continued discussion of this issue falls more into the realm of philosophical debate than Forums feedback, and thus really belongs in the Lounge.

Yeah, that's what I meant.
That was news to me. Thanks guys(?).
Yes it does. Like I'm doing now.
I agree that it's frequently superfluous, as some use it. ...but confusing? I think it's helpful to see at a glance, right there, which post someone is making specific comments about. I've already read the post in most cases, but it's more convenient than backing up (as I used to do) or clicking on the replied to link, as I now am aware of. What it allows me to do is what I'm doing now. It helps me to remember the specific points I wanted to respond to, and it permits me to do so with less typing, although more "formatting". (I don't have to write, "And as to your point about...." I say that even in face-to-face conversations if I'm responding to more than the very last thing the other person said.)

Here's where the Quote + function is useful. No one commented on that. Is that available in this software package?

Yes, very odd. But this is in no way equivalent to face-to-face conversation. I think one of my points above covers the way I think of this.
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't use the E word.

Ok, so I'm interpreting here... These points are not issues of options within this software package, as I thought they might be, but rather consequences of which software package is chosen. As such, you are certainly correct that this line of discussion (I plan on this being my last contribution to it) diverges into Lounge material, rather than feedback on the features that are possible here.

I was operating under the belief (arrived at by observation on another forum) that "threaded mode" was an option, and that even individual users could choose "flat mode" or perhaps some other option. Apparently not. So, I conclude that the answer to my first question as to the advantages of threaded mode is really that it's a choice, a preference. N'est pas?

> I wouldn't mind having that as an option, but I'd absolutely want to keep the current one too.

Agreed, cyn; the current option *is* a far better one for posters with issues than was the old one.

(Truth be told, the e-mails I used to get were almost always so fragmented by UBB code that they were almost unreadable, anyhow.)