Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 153 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

It looks like that text like "2 seconds ago" has been changed to "just now". This makes sense with time that has ended, like the time of posting questions/answers/comments.

When trying to accept an answer one also gets this time text in a message, like this:

You can accept an answer in 30 seconds

However, with the "just now" update the wording in this case has become a little weird:

You can accept an answer just now

It says it's possible to accept an answer 'just now' but in fact it's not possible at the moment you get the message.

Although this may sound like nitpicking, I'd like to propose changing it to something more meaningful.

share|improve this question
Regression caused by this, possibly? – hammar Sep 13 '11 at 14:42
Good catch! I think most simple solution is to put back the old counter in this specific scenario so the user will know exactly when he can accept the answer. – Shadow Wizard Sep 13 '11 at 14:47
Even if you could accept at that point (not getting the message,) the message is entirely awkward anyway. What on earth has 'just' got to do with anything anyway, sounds as informal as slang. What's wrong with 'now' for now? Since we're talking of relative times, anything after now has no comparison containing 'now.' (i.e '2 minutes after 'just now'') – Grant Thomas Sep 13 '11 at 15:23
"If you are reading this message, you can accept an answer." – tvanfosson Sep 13 '11 at 15:48
Changing it to "now" isn't a bad idea; that would fix this one as well – Michael Mrozek Sep 13 '11 at 15:57
@Mr.D It indicates that the time is not exactly now, but rather in the near vicinity of now. Using "just" that way is quite common and not informal. "About now" would mean nearly the same thing but is more awkward, and "around now" seems too loose. I like "just now" when shown on a post I just made. In fact you can think of it as being short for "this post was just made now" or similar. – Matthew Read Sep 13 '11 at 16:01
@Michael Would it? Still seems weird to me. The page should just refresh itself if it wants you to refresh it immediately. – Matthew Read Sep 13 '11 at 16:02
@Matthew Well, giving you the error "you can accept an answer now" isn't great either, but at least it's grammatical – Michael Mrozek Sep 13 '11 at 16:22
Please fix this immediately! – JonH Sep 13 '11 at 16:50
@Michael: Alternatively "just now" could only apply to short time differences in the past and "momentarily" could apply to short time differences in the future. – Rick Sladkey Sep 13 '11 at 22:55
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Changing this so for future dates < 4 seconds it will be

you can foo the bar momentarily

while for past dates < 4 seconds it will remain

you fooed the bar just now

share|improve this answer
Please don't use "momentarily". To those of us not using American English that means "for a moment" (so then you'll get people asking why they can only accept an answer for a few seconds), please consider just using "in a moment" or "in a few seconds", which mean exactly what they say. (Sorry to move the comment, but this post is the newer, and probably more relevant, one) – DMA57361 Sep 14 '11 at 9:01
I second @DMA and "in a few seconds" sounds better IMO. – Shadow Wizard Sep 14 '11 at 9:16
I should say my point isn't against American English, but that "you can foo the bar momentarily" reads incorrectly to anyone using another form of the language (and so a sizeable(?) proportion of the site's users), while something like "you can foo the bar in a few seconds" should read correctly for everyone. – DMA57361 Sep 14 '11 at 9:21
'Usage Note: Momentarily is widely used in speech to mean "in a moment," as in The manager is on another line, but she'll be with you momentarily. This usage rarely leads to ambiguity since the intended sense can usually be determined on the basis of the tense of the verb and the context. Nonetheless, many critics hold that the adverb should be reserved for the senses "for a moment," and the extended usage is unacceptable to 59 percent of the Usage Panel.' Sometimes bells and whistles only serve to create noise. – Grant Thomas Sep 14 '11 at 17:22
@Mr.D tbh, I'm not sure if you're agreeing with my comment or making a point against it? – DMA57361 Sep 16 '11 at 10:42

The current logic is to use the phrase "just now" for time intervals less than four seconds in duration.

If it isn't too much trouble to implement, I think the user should just be allowed to accept the answer (the error message is not displayed) if the timer is within five seconds of expiring anyway.

Extra points for doing it this way on any timer that inhibits a user action (except for rate limiters like the timer to slow down posting of multiple comments).

share|improve this answer
I know this has been discussed over and over, but I would give the extra points if this is done on any timer that inhibits a user action, especially for rate limiters like the timer to slow down flagging of multiple comments. – Stewie Griffin Jan 15 '15 at 15:01

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .