all 25 comments

[–]magnora7[S] 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

Coming soon:

  1. Updating the 'hot' algorithm to be about 35% faster so the front page changes more frequently now that we have more content.

  2. "Block user" capability, to completely remove a user and their posts and comments from appearing on your view of the site. Currently users can be blocked from private messages, but nothing else.

  3. "Do not show sub CSS" checkbox on the right bar of every sub. Currently it can only be disabled for all subs at once in your user preferences.

[–]Mnemonic 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (6 children)

"Do not show sub CSS" checkbox on the right bar of every sub. Currently it can only be disabled for all subs at once in your user preferences.

Ehm, excuse me!?

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

/s/internet will be exempt, as clearly it'd be a sin to not gaze upon its loveliness.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

Why won't anyone just tell me they hate my CSS?

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

hahahaa. your css is good too man, aside from the effing postition: fixed saidit logo

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You know nothing about branding, Jon Snow.

What does it hinder?

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

it makes me feel like a tweaker that's been up for two weeks getting chased by shadow people. the saidit logo is the shadow people chasing me.

branding schmamding, it's like printing Pepsi on the inside of cups so you can see it while you are drinking.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Trust me. I have not been excessive with SaidIt branding.

[–]dark_devil_dd 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thnks 4 the good work bro. This might yet become something really good (until it goes full business mode like it seems to happen to all good companies)

[–]happysmash27 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'd rather block a user's posts than block their messages, since messages are often pretty important.

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's a great point, 'block' already has a meaning which is 'block messages' and a page for it: https://saidit.net/prefs/blocked/

I propose we rename the existing 'block' to 'block messages' and have the new link read and 'block' and mean 'block posts and comments'. And both types of blocks could be listed separately on https://saidit.net/prefs/blocked/ I wonder how RES does it and their terminology. Maybe 'block user' is fine.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sound like 3 options:

  • block posts
  • block comments
  • block user

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it's just fine still. But I'm not a pro-user.

Can you try 10% first?

Or maybe lay out a chart of the past and future? Then we can weigh in and collectively determine the rate.

Can you add a user CSS preference to view a single CSS site wide?

Maybe with the option to override all subs, as well as the option to be overwritten only by subs' custom CSS?

[–]roc 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thank you for the frequent improvements and listening to user feedback.

[–]magnora7[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No problem, happy to help make this place better.

[–]Drewski 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The transparency around banned subs is a good change.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

they had stripped out most of the code for that from the open source for some reason

That actually answers a lot.

[–]Zombi 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

/u/magnora7 should run for office. If only everyone in a leadership position was this quick and easy to work with!

[–]HibikiBlack 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for the updates, keep up the good work!

[–]Orangutan 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Great updates! Thanks.

[–]happysmash27 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To fit better with the "name-calling" section, perhaps a subtitle like "We should KILL those who disagree!", including quotes, may work. At the moment, it seems a bit awkwardly tacked on…

[–]TimesThreeTheHighest 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good work.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

[–]it_talk_like_that 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

An additional lowest level has been added of "Advocating violence against groups or individuals."

Does this include calls for violence against pedophiles?

[–]PikonParadox 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think it should not matter who the individual is in the question. Violence is still violence. That being said, if you think someone really deserves hurt, just keep it vague rather than making it obvious. We may not be above the law but the law is not necessarily the same as ethics.

Tbh violence should be a last resort for when everything else fails. Diplomacy is the preferred go-to option. Instead of hurting the said pedophile, why not try to help them change?