Disappearing Messages/Posts, 2018. (EDIT.)

Note by WebPM: I have split this off from the photography thread partly to make this discussion more accessible to others who have questions, and partly to keep the other thread on topic.)

...Finally, this is to WebPM. I may Post again, though. But after 3, 4 attempts to find WebPMs Post, I could not, and then I recall a thing said by MrRobert123, in that Replies Change depending upon how a Thread is entered, and so I clicked upon the Thread TITLE, instead of any reply (from the HOME Screen... and now I finally see your Reply, Mr.WebPM.

(I wanted to keep this Thread about Pictures, but then that happens, and so I Post it here, as it happened, rather than my previous Thread. Excuse Me.)

EDIT - From DC: This Post now does not entirely make sense, when used  as a Starting Post or as an Introduction. To anyone reading, Please ignore the sentence here which says that this Thread is "about pictures", for THIS Thread is not about pictures at all..!! Most of all, Please see the first *Real* Post from myself, below. I myself can only wait to see what other people (including NAS) do regarding this Thread...

Parents
  • This time, it is WebPMs message (and 2 others) which is missing. From the same day, entered NOT via the Title. (Monday Tomorrow, Hope you are well, WebPM.)

  • These are really helpful, thank you. I'm sorry for the trouble you've had to go to in order to paste these, but they make things so much clearer, so I appreciate your help. Since the pattern appears to be consistent, I think I have enough screen shots.

    I can see what's happening, and I think I understand the reasons. I'm not sure either whether it's intended to work that way, or whether, if it is, that's a good idea, so it's going to take me some time to investigate. I'll try to have an answer in a couple of weeks; I'm not sure, especially with the holiday coming, whether I can do better than that.

    The difference is, as I think  has suggested, between a view that is centred on a message, and a view of the whole thread. This forum,as we know, takes a "nesting" approach, that takes account of the fact that I am replying to a message from DC, and shows that by indenting my message under DC's. By contrast, in a "linear" forum, my message would always be last, even if DC's were ten messages higher in the thread.

    So, if you follow a link to my message in this thread, the software is mostly concerned to show my message in context with DC's, and also any replies to my message in particular. For that reason, it does not show any other replies to DC's message. If I scroll down a bit and use Load Next, those other replies appear, but below the messages that are already showing. These Load Next links are just out of shot in most of the screen images above.

    If you follow a link to the whole thread, then all replies are shown in their places (although you may have to use Load Next or Load Previous to display them). As a result, if you've started with a link to a message, the "missing" messages under discussion in this thread may, when revealed, appear somewhat lower down in the thread than if you started with a link to the thread.

    Links to messages appear in email notifications, and also in the forum in "In reply to" links above messages. Links to the thread appear in listings of the topics in a particular forum, and of course the list of topics on the forum home page.

    As I said, I am not sure that listing the same messages in different orders in different circumstances is helpful. I will need to look into this before commenting much further, including speaking to the software suppliers.

    I am sorry to DC for causing offence by moving this topic into a separate thread. It has been helpful to me to be able to see this topic in isolation from others, and has made it easier to understand. My apologies if that was not true for others. I'll try to find better ways of starting a new thread if I do need to move messages, but I was conscious that starting a split thread with a message of my own would complicate the nesting and ordering.

    I have mentioned before that, in my view, neither nested nor linear forums cope well when many themes are discussed together in one thread. We've seen what happens in a nested forum such as this. In a linear forum, contributors tend to quote massively from the messages to which they are replying, because several essentially-unrelated messages are interspersed, and the whole string becomes huge and hard to read.

Reply
  • These are really helpful, thank you. I'm sorry for the trouble you've had to go to in order to paste these, but they make things so much clearer, so I appreciate your help. Since the pattern appears to be consistent, I think I have enough screen shots.

    I can see what's happening, and I think I understand the reasons. I'm not sure either whether it's intended to work that way, or whether, if it is, that's a good idea, so it's going to take me some time to investigate. I'll try to have an answer in a couple of weeks; I'm not sure, especially with the holiday coming, whether I can do better than that.

    The difference is, as I think  has suggested, between a view that is centred on a message, and a view of the whole thread. This forum,as we know, takes a "nesting" approach, that takes account of the fact that I am replying to a message from DC, and shows that by indenting my message under DC's. By contrast, in a "linear" forum, my message would always be last, even if DC's were ten messages higher in the thread.

    So, if you follow a link to my message in this thread, the software is mostly concerned to show my message in context with DC's, and also any replies to my message in particular. For that reason, it does not show any other replies to DC's message. If I scroll down a bit and use Load Next, those other replies appear, but below the messages that are already showing. These Load Next links are just out of shot in most of the screen images above.

    If you follow a link to the whole thread, then all replies are shown in their places (although you may have to use Load Next or Load Previous to display them). As a result, if you've started with a link to a message, the "missing" messages under discussion in this thread may, when revealed, appear somewhat lower down in the thread than if you started with a link to the thread.

    Links to messages appear in email notifications, and also in the forum in "In reply to" links above messages. Links to the thread appear in listings of the topics in a particular forum, and of course the list of topics on the forum home page.

    As I said, I am not sure that listing the same messages in different orders in different circumstances is helpful. I will need to look into this before commenting much further, including speaking to the software suppliers.

    I am sorry to DC for causing offence by moving this topic into a separate thread. It has been helpful to me to be able to see this topic in isolation from others, and has made it easier to understand. My apologies if that was not true for others. I'll try to find better ways of starting a new thread if I do need to move messages, but I was conscious that starting a split thread with a message of my own would complicate the nesting and ordering.

    I have mentioned before that, in my view, neither nested nor linear forums cope well when many themes are discussed together in one thread. We've seen what happens in a nested forum such as this. In a linear forum, contributors tend to quote massively from the messages to which they are replying, because several essentially-unrelated messages are interspersed, and the whole string becomes huge and hard to read.

Children
  • There are two more examples of the same thing recently, where on entering a thread you only see the summary of upvoted posts, and not the posts themselves until you click on one of those summaries

    I experience the same problem!

  • Hello Ms/Mr @WebPM

    There are two more examples of the same thing recently, where on entering a thread you only see the summary of upvoted posts, and not the posts themselves until you click on one of those summaries:

    http://community.autism.org.uk/f/miscellaneous-and-chat/12697/encouraged-to-move-nearer-relatives-by-mental-health-facilitator/

    http://community.autism.org.uk/f/miscellaneous-and-chat/12136/new-friend/74338#74338

    So it looks like it has repeated - is it something in the HTML of the comments, or the page structure?

  • Working now. I wondered if it might be why some other comments weren't showing.

  • Please try it now. This was an HTML issue, and looks like something of a one-off. However, we are working with our suppliers to try to prevent any repetition.

    Regards


  • OK, here's an odd one: http://community.autism.org.uk/f/adults-on-the-autistic-spectrum/12572/trying-to-get-support/ lists '7 replies', and at the moment none of them are showing up for me.

    When you go to the thread ~ or seeming lack of it, tap or click the name of the upvoted poster's (such as your post) and the posts should appear like the with the Load Previous or Load Next tabs at various points through long threads.

    If that helps any?

  • We're working on this one, which seems a rather unusual issue. I'll post again when we have had time to investigate more.

  • Even stranger is that I now have the same problem with the thread that you and Robert have described above, but earlier when I replied all messages showed up.

  • Yes, same here. That was when Song's reply was the only one voted up.  Now I've voted up

    no still just seeing the first two 'Top replies' and no responses underneath.

  • Good example .

    But when I press on song's reply, all messages appear.

  • OK, here's an odd one: http://community.autism.org.uk/f/adults-on-the-autistic-spectrum/12572/trying-to-get-support/ lists '7 replies', and at the moment none of them are showing up for me.

  • Thank you for the correction. That makes perfect sense. I should have checked the documentation more thoroughly.

  • This is my last Post for "Tonight".

    Right at the current end of this Thread... Mr LoneWarrior and myself did a thing - again - to prove a thing -again- and the result was that we could NOT delete Posts after they had been replied to, and that Quotes within them do not change either. (Apart from if a UserName changes.)

    Only the person who Posted can change/edit their Post... excepting NAS, of course. (Hence UserName changing.)

    To WebPM... this does not change the purpose of this Thread, however. My last reply to your good self still stands, up there. Thanks for reading.

  • ...To Cassandro again. 

    I would have posted something trivial, as you asked, but apologies, I have not, because what you state is an important change which I for one did not know about.

    You or I may post something after this - Reply to the START to put it at the bottom of the Thread -- and then as a willing reply (trivial) is gained, then an experiment may be begun and proved.This is what myself and LoneWarrior once did, Months ago, as a kind of "live chat". But it relies much upon CHANCE and I am not all that reliable... i.e. not always able to sign on, here.

    I thank you again, and shall (try to) watch this business, now...!

  • I'd never deleted a post before. It includes an option 'delete children'. If someone posts something (trivial) in reply to this, I can try deleting this comment and seeing what happens.

    Thank You VERY much for that, Cassandro! 

     This is a new change which I was not aware of... but the thing is...

    I may start and pay attention to "Maintenance" Threads such as this, and few others may know (care) how important they are... but I am not NAS, and so do not know about small changes or updates such as this...!

    Thank You again...

  • I'd never deleted a post before. It includes an option 'delete children'. If someone posts something (trivial) in reply to this, I can try deleting this comment and seeing what happens.

    It makes sense that you can't change another user quoting you. If you meant something other that what was quoted, I suppose you have to post again to say what you've changed and why.

  • P.S. - Anyone who agrees with that Post, please Post something as well. Likes are useful, but WebPM (and NAS) seem to pay more attention to Input... sort of...  

    :-/

  • And yes, I believe that, if a comment is deleted, replies would also be deleted, because they would have lost their places in the thread.

    Thank You again, Mr WebPM for taking time to answer. However as far as I know... 

    Mr LoneWarrior and myself once  took a time to confirm... that as soon as a Post gains a Reply, then it CANNOT be deleted. Before the update in October-Whenever... Posts could be deleted... but NOT since then. In order to "delete" a reply since then, the best that is managed is Editing the Post to replace all of the text with something like:

    "        .        "

    ...There are many many examples. But if someone QUOTES a modified message, then the quote does not change.

    Only THAT User can change what THAT User Posts, but they cannot change what OTHER Users Quote from THAT User.

    (For instance, I cannot delete the Posts to which you reply, but I can blank them by replacing all of the text with:  " .  ". Yet I shall not do so after reply and never will without stating: EDIT. So There, Nerrr.)

  • Thank you for the example. I don't think those messages are in bad taste; they are real and personal. If anything, I feel awkward about using them for this purpose. I hope it's right that I do, and helps with the mutual support that is being provided.

    It has now allowed me to work things out, so hopefully that's a good thing.

    I would suggest that the "standard" message order is best seen by linking to the thread itself. On that basis, the "waiting is killing me" comment to which you replied was followed by a short side-conversation between BlueRay and Robert123, then an exchange between yourself and NAS15974, with a further response from California to BlueRay interspersed, and finally (at the time of writing) NAS15974 responds to a higher-level comment from the moderator.

    The link to your reply that you provided shows, as you said, your message immediately below its "parent", the "waiting is killing me" comment. California's response to BlueRay shows, but not BlueRay's message itself. There's a link of course "in reply to BlueRay" that loads a version of the thread centred on BlueRay's message (i.e. it's a link directly to that message, instead of to yours).

    So, it's true that those views can omit messages, and my apologies for taking so long to see it, and for anyone who was frustrated by this (DC in particular, I feel). It's quite hard to work out. What I need to do is to get some rules from the suppliers on how they do these things.

    I can see the intention, so I think it's a design decision, rather than a bug. If you follow a link to the message, that message is shown in context - i.e. with its "parent", so that it's easy to see to what the message author was replying, and hence you can understand the response more easily. Two links to two different messages in the same thread will therefore produce differing views of the thread (which is what you found). If you want to review the whole thread and see everything in context, try a link to the thread.

    And yes, I believe that, if a comment is deleted, replies would also be deleted, because they would have lost their places in the thread. Thinking about the content, they would also be replies to something that the previous author no longer wished to say in public. In some cases, if I said something and then regretted it, anything that someone said in response might just make things worse, and be best removed?

  • I can't speak for DC, but I thought earlier today that one of my messages must have been deleted by a moderator (I could potentially see why because of 'triggering' content, but would have expected a direct message or something). It was however, as you describe to do with the order in which the messages had been originally posted. If I link to one post [71236] by NAS15974 (warning: suicide references), my reply doesn't show up even though it's a direct response, because other replies to a higher level had been posted in the interim. You have to click 'Load Next' twice for it to show up. If you follow the link directly to my reply (also possibly in bad taste), it appears underneath what it's a reply to without the intervening higher-level posts, which have disappeared.

    If someone deletes a comment, do all the replies to that comment, and replies to those replies, also get deleted?

  • I'm chasing this up. However, I still believe that this is about threads being displayed with messages in different orders, as I set out in my previous (lengthy) response. I've seen your suggestion that I can see messages because I'm using an administrator account, but I don't believe that that is the difference.

    I can see why the order varies (and I explained that too). However, I can also see why that's confusing.

    I remain of the view that no system is perfect, and in particular that no forum system copes well with threads that get very long and complex, and cover several different issues. To that extent, I see your point that threads are tending to be shorter as a good thing.

    I said that I thought that I had enough examples to allow me to understand the issue. Nonetheless, do please post more screenshots, ideally with the links as well, if you still see it happening. Do please check, though, as I suggested, that the missing messages are not displayed further down the thread, and visible if you Load Next or Load Previous.