HEY!!! I just did an edit, and it worked!!!
I changed 'an' to 'am' - and it actually carried over.
wow

But I was still sent back to the first post in the thread, at #1 page 1.



See?
Things are being worked out, one thing at a time.

Maybe the default font will get worked in there somewhere.
I hate this this (what is it - Times New Roman or Courier New size 1 or 10pt) font.

Change it to Verdana or Tahoma size 2 - or 12 pt. SOMETHING!!! - that is closer to the older format.

The link supposed to take you to the last post (the little grey arrow pointing right) also doesn't work.

Following on from my last post:

... getting a full size reply window now, good work guys (and the enlarge editor commands seems to work fine now as well).

Franbo

If you click on someone's nick and look at their profile. Then click on metaverse profile, you end up looking at your own meta profile and not theirs.

In Opera (9.25), My Replies still doesn't show "visited since last post" (all links are bold). I also finally noticed the Last Post and "My" last post are wonky as mentioned above--it appears to just show last post whether or not I made it.

Also, I consistently get a "no such thing" error on first click of View all recent posts. If I click the link on that error page, then I get the recent items.

On the font size thing, I suspect us tired-eyes folk were tricked by the additional white space. It's interesting to see the Member No. info, but the new left column creates lots of wasted real estate for longer posts. (Yes, I know I type too much )

The error I reported earlier was gone, but it's back now. Here's a screenshot of it from the Stardock Forums. The same issues affecting these forums appear to be affecting them as well.

I was getting the operation aborted error quite a lot at home but I've not got one at work. I'm using IE6 in both cases however I don't have my security screwed down so tightly to block ActiveX and Java scripts on my work PC.

Excellent new 'layout'... and, since i've been using Mozilla 1.7.11/Gecko (no longer supported, but has been replaced with SeaMonkey - which i will possibly upgrade to, if ever!) to visit these forums, i had experienced a few glitches before; but, now, all is perfectly lined-up.
I do use ad-block a lot to clearup the mess of some repetive footers & unwanted pub-images and thought the site framework didn't react so well to this customized method; not so, it was the engine itself and what steps Moz had to do to adapt to it (somehow).

Kinda new, but i DO like this format.


- Zyxpsilon.

Oh oh, I have one. Quote somebody who has already quoted somebody. The second set of quote flags don't appear.

Using FF 2.0.0.10 here.

I actually had something related to quote flags as well. It was a user error but the error was difficult to detect because of what I think may be an error in parsing unbalanced quote tags.

For example, I often quote an entire reply that itself includes quoted text. In this case I expect the quotes to cascade.

As a quick example

{quote}{quote}
quoted text from reply
{/quote}
reply text
{/quote}

should appear like this



However in a similar situation you may want to simply string a sequence of quotes.

{quote}
quote 1
{/quote}
response 1

{quote}
quote 2
{/quote}
response 2

And this should appear like


response 1


response 2

However if you make a mistake and instead have the following

{quote}
quote 1
{/quote}
response 1

quote 2
{/quote}
response 2

I attempted to put in the real example of the unbalanced quote here but it totally screwed up the entire reply in totally non obvious ways which in fact basically demonstrated the problem I'm trying to report. I also tried moving the offending tags to both the beginning and the end of the reply but still no joy. What I will do is place the single example in the following reply.


However in this case I would expect the above error to come out like this.


response 1

quote 2
{/quote}
response 2

I'm not totally sure that I'm correct as to what the proper parsing of incorrectly specified quote tags should be but the way I proposed places the error in a far easier place to figure out where the error is. When I first made the mistake for the life of me I couldn't figure out why my initial {/quote} wasn't being accepted when there was actually no problem with it but the problem was that a following {quote} was missing.

{quote}
quote 1
{/quote}
response 1

quote 2
{/quote}
response 2

displays as


response 2

Actually it does appear that quoting a reply with a quote in it is now totally messed up.

Not only do no embedded quotes appear in the quote it also appears to me that now there is a total loss of every carriage return in the quoted text leaving the result totally formless.

I think this is a recent development since I think this used to work OK, or least the removal of carriage returns did not previously occur.

Another issue that I just discovered is that there has been a change to the ability to edit the OP of a thread.

It appears that this is allowed however it also appears that it is now required to give an explanation about why the OP is being edited.

This is the justification that I entered when I went to update the OP of the MVL RUles thread. Luckily this didn't appear in the OP itself where it could be very confusing (actually that is a rather long OP so I'm not positive about this, but I did give a cursory look and couldn't find it).

Anyway this is what I wrote:

This OP is continually updated with the current state of MVL Rules. These are expected to change often and the desire is to have a single place where the current rules may be accessed. I'm hopeful that the ability to modify the OP of a thread will still be allowed without undue complication since this is a feature that is commonly used to provide a single source of information that may need continual update.

Another minor point is that the editing of the OP is not in exactly the same format as the original post in that it appears to enforce some kind of double spacing.

As I said in my justification, I hope this functionality will still be allowed without undue complication.

Congrats for the forum upgrade! It looks a lot more like state of the art than before.

The text box is fine for me, using Firefox 2.0.0.12. Just a note: The link to the thread "Forums are back up" from the main forums page (under GalCiv II News/General) points to a "this post has been removed message".

I think there was a double-posting of the announcement and that one got the axe.