Wedge

Yeah, thanks for explaining that about trackbacks...my use for trackbacks is different than Gri's (Nao's right about Gri's interests, basically speaking. There does appear to be more than just that, but that's all I'll say on the matter in public). My interest in trackbacks and, indeed, FoMT, has more to do with research discussions that usually contain references to the discussion in question, and the progression of such a discussion is useful to track back on...and it's not necessary that YOU understand any purpose to such a mod, Nao. Just understand that I want one because *I* have a use for it, quite independent of Gri's use for it, thanks. Still, if it absolutely cannot be done, it absolutely cannot be done, and that's that.

Thanks for telling me about Gri's discussions with you, Arantor. That's certainly illuminating. Gri has popped up on a board in his quest for grivitational codes and as must be the case with everybody who knows good coding, the board's owner is already busy on priority projects and has already run into that won't-take-no wall, ha. Okay, so I'll give up, but there is another aspect (the one I won't talk about in public) that could do with further discussion via PM, if that's okay.

-sigh- What do you actually want? Pretend I know nothing of Gri or WP trackbacks...

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand either...

Well, I've already described the situations I was in where I could have used such a capability on other boards (my attempts to reconstruct the 1900 House thread on the now defunct PBS Discussions board, which used a totally/completely different boardware. There were a good number such research threads on that board that got locked by the mods only because they couldn't otherwise control the influx of spammers, while we legitimate people wanted to discuss things further and post more links to research articles. ReCaptcha was tried and didn't work, and PBS et al had just had significant budget/staff cuts).  A lot of work went into those research threads, and now all that work is lost.

Had that board been an SMF board with the capability of not only preserving the information but the progress of the discussion to reference later, things would be more desirable.  But here's something that the PBS board did that SMF doesn't do adequately--That board gave you a choice between Flat View and Tree View. SMF defaults what amounts to their Flat View, which is fine when you're looking to read posts sequentially, but finding its Tree View capability isn't so intuitive. Tree View permits the viewing of who replies to which post and where a specialized discussion branches off from the main trunk, as it were. It was a sort of line-of-discussion map.

Trackback in SMF is what I latched onto, seeing what Gri had done with it on griv.tk (briefly--he took it back off), but as a reasonable substitute for that I would accept a mod that would provide a Flat View/Tree View choice just to follow a given line of discussion/branch-off. And of course, this arrangement happens only on the board itself rather than being across different boards (and the reason for crossing boards was already given in my different-community-boards-toward-robotic-development scenario.  There are other efforts besides robotic that involve interdisciplinary research, I hasten to point out, and the ability for boards to cross-pollinate along those interdisciplinary lines is useful...ESPECIALLY when a line of discussion is preserved on one board when its related-but-different board goes out of service...but...you've both successfully pointed out that this is introduces a vulnerability, so I'm at a loss with this.

And yeah--in the PBS Discussion Board situation, the ability to carry on a discussion while referencing previously posted research information despite the thread getting locked is the one interest I share with Gri.

No, it's nothing the hell to do with Gri's interest. They share similarity at the most basic level of commonality.

He wants to be able to continue the same discussion in two places at once. You want to be able to reference something from somewhere else, which is literally as complex as copy/pasting the URL, or something very similar to the WP trackback which has never been implemented in SMF to the best of my knowledge.

Threaded view vs flat view is a discussion that's been had more than once by us, and is something Nao and I can never agree on (even though, interestingly enough, I was asked about it only yesterday elsewhere), if only because there is no good way that we can think of to actually manage it in performance terms. Storing the relationship of posts is easy enough, even the ghastliness of the UI can be ironed out (did you ever see how it is handled in vBulletin? Dear god that's messy) but performance is always going to be hurting in that respect.

1.

While I appreciate what you're trying to get at, I don't particularly find much joy in the "I would accept..." tone because it implies a relationship other than what we're doing, i.e. we build what we want and if people don't like it, *shrug*, because we're not in this to bow to the desires of everyone else.

Regarding your footnote--well, you ASKED what I wanted. You got your answer. Carry on.

-sigh- I asked what you wanted, yes, to ascertain whether it was desirable functionality or not to include as a core feature, not because I was saying that I would build something you were asking for. Your tone indicates that you feel as though we are going to include it, which is not the case in the slightest.

100% your own inference, sir--none of my doing. Speaking of tone, I don't accept getting ripped just for answering your question. Good day.

You've made it clear enough many times already, don't worry, everyone knows we only work on things we'd like to have themselves!
But that shouldn't stop people from trying to convince us to implement something. They should just know it's "no" to begin with, and then maybe we'll change our minds later (or just give a definitive "no".)

As for threaded, I propose that we at least include and include the parent ID for all posts. It won't kill performance... As long as we don't use it, we don't even need to bother. But if we ever implement it in the future, it'd be nice that old posts get ID relationships immediately; even if we don't implement anything, we may end up releasing a mod for this, or even someone else... Really, it's something I'd rather have under the hand, even if the final threaded view smells like it was built as an afterthought, I don't really care -- some people like it that way. Some bloggers will want comment relationships (which, I believe it should be pointed out, doesn't help a discussion that is taking place currently, but is definitely helpful once a discussion is over. I think we could even make it so that a blog post's comments are shown in threaded mode by default if it has less than 50 comments and the last post is older than a week....)

Yes indeed, you do get the idea.  However because of Arantor's attitude I've posted a request for a Flat View/ Tree View toggle feature on a future version of SMF, minus the guffy attitude regarding to what I find acceptable.

I have no problem with people suggesting things, nor with people encouraging us to implement things they'll find useful. It is only when it goes into feeling like a demand that it trips my switch (and did I mention I've been extra touchy lately due to family stuff like a funeral?)

To be quite honest, I have no idea what the hell I was thinking when I agreed to this, because I knew this is how it would turn out, people taking a simple direct question (namely 'what is it you're talking about') and inferring that it is going to be built and making it sound less like a request and more like a demand.

You talk about huffy attitude but there is no way to interpret " but as a reasonable substitute for that I would accept" as anything other than a direct expectation of building something I had little desire or interest in building.

Going to take a few days off the internet. Hopefully I'm going to calm down and start being constructive again but frankly I doubt it.

Don't find a good excuse to leave me again, you little, little man! :P

(hmm, where did I get that ending quote from? Tip of my tongue! must be British. Said by a woman. Can't remember argh.)

:edit: Ha! I remember now. It was Helen Hunt... Was in Mad About You.

FWIW I took the "I want" as a demand also and seems to be confirmed by her using Arantors not wishing to do it to justify her requesting the same from SMF mod'ers what she finds acceptable. Commonly known as playing one off against the other.
Personally I like the original plan of you guys creating YOUR vision, what's important for the creativity is that it meets your needs and desires, not others.

@Arantor - condolences

I was asked what I wanted and I demanded nothing. Going into something having a foregone conclusion before you begin is, by definition, pre-judgement (prejudice). Such is the nature of your wolfpack (and wild) imagination. I see now why working with a larger team isn't your strong suit.