I don't like the new news aggregate thing that's so flavor of the month right now, but I don't get the hate on the like buttons. It's not like their being there harms anything very much and it is pretty easily ignored.

On turning the site into a game industry aggregator though, please don't go down that road. There are plenty of other sites that do it better, and all it does is make the original content harder to find. Maybe allow people to do it for hand picked articles of high quality, but just grabbing everything the internet has to provide will make it crappy.

Maybe you should work on developing ways to make it easier to generate content rather than working on developing ways to grab other people's content? That solves the low quantity of new content and would be far more interesting imo.

edit: or maybe find a way to keep aggregated news and original content separate. It might be handy to have a small stream on the side of aggregate news and give original content more screen real estate for longer periods of time.

[quote name='Hodgman' timestamp='1303090472' post='4799693']
[quote name='Michael Tanczos' timestamp='1303011096' post='4799358']
Find my content is fixed

[/quote]

This is how it always is.

Userbase: We've found this bug, and it's a real easy fix. You're method seems correct, but it seems like only 1 line of code would fix it.

Dev: It's not that easy! It's never that easy! blah blah blah it'll be awhile. I'll evaluate it for the next release cycle.

Userbase: But..

Dev: Not buts.. stupid users. I SAID I'LL EVALUATE THAT FIX FOR THE NEXT RELEASE CYCLE. UNTIL THEN LUMP IT. IF YOUR DATA IS CORRUPTING ON SAVE, JUST DON'T SAVE YOUR DATA! HEY- WE'LL MARK THIS ISSUE AS CLOSED, SINCE NOT SAVING YOUR DATA IS A VALID WORKAROUND!

Userbase: Let's burn this place to the ground!

Dev: *changes one line of code, hits F5, and posts fixed binary*

If only the GIMP userbase would do the same.
[/quote]


Its usually never a matter of whether something is easy to fix or not - it's just when you have a large quantity of stuff you have old issues vs new issues, and the triage process is how you sift through them all to prioritize things. The "Find My Content" issue, for example, is part of a bigger problem with the way the IPS search works - because it was related to the same steps it took to fix "Active Content" I was able to do that fix relatively quickly. But it's not that way with all bugs.. originally this bug took a lot of looking through the IPS source to isolate and ultimately it ended up being a problem with the Sphinx config their software generates. They claim all this stuff related to search will be fixed in the upcoming version - but then their release date for it is listed as "2011". We can't wait that long for a window of time that is uncertain.

Anyway, so this bug was overlooked in the original fix in our current top priority list - we do update our priority list of bugs, but we have to schedule them to be fixed as well and some things we can't get to for a while.

Just a side thing, the max number of + votes per day thing is really annoyingly low. I think I made 2 upvotes last night and this morning I have done 0 and I am at my max upvotes for the day. Makes the feature feel very useless.

edit:
It should also be noted that - votes seem to be limitless leaving a net negative flow of reputation through the system.

Just a side thing, the max number of + votes per day thing is really annoyingly low. I think I made 2 upvotes last night and this morning I have done 0 and I am at my max upvotes for the day. Makes the feature feel very useless.

edit:
It should also be noted that - votes seem to be limitless leaving a net negative flow of reputation through the system.

I modified the voting limit from 5 to 50. Let me know if this limit becomes an issue. =)

For anyone still watching this thread - we've made quite a few changes to the news the last few days based on your feedback. While we have a few more tricks up our sleeve, let us know if you have any further ideas how we can make the news a better source of information for you.

There seems to be a bug where posts with the user-name "SiCrane" don't show up for long.

For anyone still watching this thread - we've made quite a few changes to the news the last few days based on your feedback.[/quote]
Good to know there has been some progress on some of these issues.

While we have a few more tricks up our sleeve, let us know if you have any further ideas how we can make the news a better source of information for you.[/quote]
Here, or using the "feedback" button?

[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1302977307' post='4799195']
Which, I completely agree, ruins the value of the whole thing.
I do think that they should hide the first -1 rating (makes the site seem friendlier), but two -2 ratings should then show up as -2, not -1.
And positive +1,+2, etc... there's no reason whatsoever to hide that!

Maybe, but the problem with that is it relies on X number of people with enough knowedge to see a bad post and down rate it before it becomes visable which adds to the chance of someone who DOESNT know better following the advise.

Clamping negative rep, sure I can see that as the number follows you around, but the ability to mark a post as 'bad' in a technical form is, imo, very important...
[/quote]
When in doubt for each post they can add a CSS opacity value of (rating > -1 ? 1 : (rating < -5 ? 0.2 : (6 + rating) / 5)). I already mentioned and showed code to make posts that are rated up glow.

Almost would be curious if posts rated so poorly could be collapsed with a "show" operation. Might be overkill though. Or not depending on if you really do want to hide horrible answers or trolls.

Almost would be curious if posts rated so poorly could be collapsed with a "show" operation. Might be overkill though. Or not depending on if you really do want to hide horrible answers or trolls.

There is an option to filter out posts based on rating. Just above the shared buttons and the fast reply area there's a bar labeled something like "Currently viewing all posts. Change threshold?" The options are a little silly though, with threshold values of -20, -10, 0, 10 and 20. I don't think I've ever seen a post rated above 10 or below -10. Personally, if I used a threshold, I'd probably set it around -2 or -3. I can't see what the point of any threshold above 0 would be since the vast majority of posts including OPs stay at 0.