As designed Open thread last unread - random point

[Shanj]

IF THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR YOU
please do NOT clog up this thread by saying it's working fine.

When I and others open a thread it opens around the middle of the page OR it opens at midpoint of pagination. Occasionally at last post or first post.
This happens even with new UNREAD threads - and it's not locating at the last unread if some posts have been read. It's either random or locating at midpoint.

Might be a Firefox integration bug (I use Firefox and one or two other sufferers seem to be FF user5s.)

Some users are reporting the function is OK as open at "last unread."

See this post for good summary of reports so far.

http://xenforo.com/community/thread...13/page-3#post-37566

 

[Brandon_R]

It goes to the First Unread Post, not the last. Even though it may look random and opening in the middle of the thread, it actually works.

If the thread title is normal, it will go to the first post [already read]
If it's bold it will go to the First Unread Post which may not be the last unread post or even on the last page.

 

[David Thomas]

It goes to the First Unread Post, not the last. Even though it may look random and opening in the middle of the thread, it actually works.

If the thread title is normal, it will go to the first post [already read]
If it's bold it will go to the First Unread Post which may not be the last unread post or even on the last page.

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/yuck-open-thread-to-random-post-grrrr.2513/page-3#post-37566

 

[Shanj]

Brandon did you check the link I sent with my report? I don't think you did.

Also I did say that for SOME users the function is working OK as an "open at last unread" thing.
By saying that I am making it clear that for OTHERS it's not working like that.

I do not expect to open a new totally unread threade and get dumped in the 5th page of 10; or the 6th post on the page.
There is some evidence this is a Firefox issue.

IF THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR YOU please do NOT clog up this thread by saying you're OK.

 

[Mike]

It is entirely reasonable for someone to say they can't reproduce your issue. It is not reasonable to shout them down for this.

Reiterating my post from the thread in question:

I have to say I've never seen the issue/bug being discussed. I posted about it somewhere else, but if you mark a/all forums read or if an old thread is bumped up, you're going to get jumped into it even though you've never actually "read" it. The former is a situation where you're telling the system you've read it; the latter is mostly a technical limit (the data isn't kept around permanently as there's quite a lot of it).

The problem with trying to debug this situation (if it happens for reasons other than those) is that the act of seeing the issue manipulates the data (since the thread is now read). I'd literally have to be looking all all the data before someone hit the issue before I could say whether it is a bug, or if it's one of those things from above. If it happens and you tell me the thread it's happening with, then I might be able to make some guesses.

Just to extend the point, I need to know:

• The thread it happens on
• Whether you have actually read the thread or not; if you have, the page number you last loaded (or ideally, a rough number of replies in the thread)
• The number of the post you were taken to -- actually, the URL that you were taken to would be better
• Whether you use the mark a/all forums read feature

I've not seen an issue with the feature. I'm trying to figure out if there's a legitimate bug (notwithstanding the restrictions noted in my quote) or if it's simply confusion over how it (jumping to first unread) works. How it works wouldn't fundamentally change. (I'm not referring to what you click by that; I'm referring to the concept of going to the first unread post.)

 

[David Thomas]

Just happened here: http://xenforo.com/community/threads/suggestion-add-a-site-map-feature.919/#post-37645

Never seen that thread a day in my life. Used "What's New?" to view threads, then clicked that one.

I clicked the thread title, took me to that post.

I never mark any/all forums as read.

 

[Mike]

That's an example of an "old" thread being bumped up, so that isn't a bug. (Note that I'm not getting into the expectations of clicking the thread title in this post; that is a separate issue. I'm focusing on the report of a bug beyond the caveats I've listed.)

 

[David Thomas]

I know you aren't talking about the expectations of the thread title.

I didn't look at the creation date of that thread, my bad. I'll report here if it happens with a recent thread.

 

[DoctorWatsOn]

That's an example of an "old" thread being bumped up, so that isn't a bug.

As a matter of interest what's the timeframe between the pervious 'last post' and a 'new post' being added that would mean that it's an 'old thread being bumped'?

Does that question make sense?

 

[Dean]

After 10 days posts are marked as read, even if they have not been read.

At least that is what was posted, and what I tested.

 

[DoctorWatsOn]

Oh, I must have missed that.

Thanks.

 

[Brandon_R]

Sorry you guys.

 

[Floris]

Sorry you guys.

I accept your apology

 

[Shanj]

I don't see why what sort of thread it is should affect me, if I've never opened that thread before.
This doesn't happen to me on any other forums so I don't see why it has to here?

Similarly being dumped in the middle page of pagination, or middle post on a page, of the thread.
This also never happened to me on other forums - if it did I wouldn't have notified it as a problem.
The only time I expect to go to a later page or post in a thread is if it's automatically picking up what I personally have read before.

Anything else is a big pain.

 

[Mike]

The only time I expect to go to a later page or post in a thread is if it's automatically picking up what I personally have read before.

This is exactly what it does. (I have listed caveats above.)

 

[Been Told]

Ok, either my latest Firefox update fixed this or something happened here (or I was halucinating) - it seems I can no longer reproduce the problem.

 

[Shanj]

The only time I expect to go to a later page or post in a thread is if it's automatically picking up what I personally have read before.

This is exactly what it does. (I have listed caveats above.)

Mike this is not exactly what it does. If it were, I wouldn't be struggling to get the problem accepted.

I'm not happy about being brushed off like this. I have joined or visited COUNTLESS forums over the 14 years or so I've used the Net. I have never known this happen before so it is something specfic to XF.

If something to do with bumped up threads, or auto cutoff timing on Unread posts, is causing this mess, then whatever it is needs to be adjusted.
Because this is a fundamental, frequent irritation.
It's bad enough to make XF a reject.
Which would be crazy when so much of XF is excellent second to none.

IF - it is important to keep the system as it is because it works well for some users, then at least include a disable option on this problem. This isn't ideal as it means leaving end users to get annoyed, then doing support on them to direct them to the disable solution.
But better than just abandoning a whole sector of users to constant and basic annoyance/ frustration.

However some are not savvy enough to recognise that there's a problem or how to describe it to their admin- they'll just leave the board they are on. Surely that's not what XF should be setting up.

 

[Mike]

I don't see how you're being brushed off. I have gone into the underlying behavior of this issue in detail and have asked for information to understand why you think it's not taking you to the first unread post. As I've said before, I'm not getting into the expectation of what clicking on the title does. My post in the other thread explains the concept behind the idea.

Without specific information as to what's happening vs what you think should be happening, I can't make any change or at least debug the issue to see what's going on.

 

[Shanj]

OK Mike sorry I'll try to explain better.

When I open a thread I have never Read before
- therefore i'ts Unread - most of the time I am not placed at the firs post.
( I don't have a Preference set here on XF o view last post first)
Instead I end up somewhere in the middle.

If there is one page of posts I'm looking at a post some way down the page.
If there are several pages I'm on a page somewhere in the middle, not the first page.
Only no evedry time.
Inerestingly iof I click a noificaion email link there is no problem.

This problem is exacerbated by XF otherwise lovely design which keeps things like pagination in small pale discreet display.ha means i's no glaringly obvious which page I'm on or ha here are several. I LIKE he discreet pagination bu in his instance i's no helping.
So I start reading the posts and THEN very often they don't make sense so I have to break off and run checks
1)Check that the slider at the side shows I'm at the top
2) Scroll to top of page and check that pagination shows page 1

OR I have to ALWAYS stay wary and distrustful on XF as default and have to remember to do these checks on scroller slidebar and pagination every ime I open a thread. I don' hink ha#s workable as i's oo easy to forget ha XF has this thing.

Having DONE the checks I then need to correct the location,
and only then can I start reading the contebnt in a way that it makes sense.

Hope that's clearer.

 

[Floris]

What helps me in situations where it's hard to explain or make it come across as "it actually does not work" is make a visual video. So you can demonstrate "it should go to this thread, because the last one I read is here, but as you can see it actually goes to that thread, which I already have read, so this is not working" with a movie.