Timeline for Prevent repeated starring and unstarring of messages
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
32 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 28, 2018 at 21:09 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | Not exactly, NH. There's a time limit on retracting stars (as with votes on main), and moderators can put a stop to shenanigans on a specific message by clearing stars, but both of those have existed for many years. | |
| Mar 28, 2018 at 20:58 | comment | added | NH. | I believe this has been implemented, right? @Shog9 | |
| Dec 10, 2015 at 14:27 | history | edited | Shadow Wizard |
edited tags
|
|
| Nov 23, 2015 at 6:53 | comment | added | Meta Andrew T. | @Pacerier The Bridge chat room, i.e. Arqade's chat room. | |
| Sep 1, 2015 at 11:09 | comment | added | Pacerier | @badp, What does "child on The Bridge" mean? | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 0:58 | comment | added | Doorknob | Turns out it's possible to see who starred a message, so there's something. | |
| Mar 25, 2014 at 12:04 | comment | added | Kendall Frey | My original question was just closed, so I'll bring it up here; this should include room owners removing stars. | |
| S Mar 24, 2014 at 20:40 | history | suggested | Johannes Schaub - litb |
add tags since this is about stars
|
|
| Mar 24, 2014 at 20:15 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 24, 2014 at 20:40 | |||||
| Mar 24, 2014 at 20:13 | answer | added | Shoe | timeline score: 5 | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 11:31 | comment | added | user98085 | Yeh, I really don't like the idea of preventing re-starring (or making it count against the star cap) ... not everything that's abused by a single user needs to be turned into an inconvenience for other people. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 10:31 | answer | added | fredley | timeline score: 5 | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 23:44 | comment | added | MBraedley | @Flyk: As per my comment ^, that could punish tablet users who accidentally star in an attempt to reply. As I often pull up chat on my iPad while, for instance, watching TV, I do not like the idea that I'll have fewer stars because I'm working with a somewhat broken UI. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 23:39 | comment | added | MBraedley | In my defence (although I doubt I'm the one @badp is referring to here), it's sometimes hard to hit the reply button when I'm on my iPad. So I say give us a proper tablet UI! | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 22:24 | comment | added | jimSampica | Maybe it's morse code from users too low rep to comment | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:50 | comment | added | Travis J |
Temporary visual fix for star area flashing: (function(){var $s = $("#starred-posts"); var h = $s.height(); $s.css({height:h+"px",overflow:"auto"});})();
|
|
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:43 | comment | added | nhinkle | I think that's a reasonable way to do it. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:43 | comment | added | Flyk | @nhinkle correct | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:43 | comment | added | nhinkle | @Flyk so you're saying that if they starred, unstarred, and re-starred, it would count as 2 stars? | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:43 | comment | added | murgatroid99 | Preventing re-starring probably wouldn't help. One could just star, unstar, and then move to the next message. That could stay annoying for a while. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:42 | comment | added | Flyk | @Shog9 probably the easiest way would be to make the act of unstarring not refund the star - that way the person in question has a finite amount of stars. Alternatively, implement something similar to the comment upvoting/un-upvoting where you prevent re-starring of a message. If you wanted to really push the boat out you could allow moderators to see who is taking part in this kind of behaviour so they could launch said user into the sun | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:42 | comment | added | badp | @Shog9 There is no big problem in stopping abuse on any one message; you can just delete it e.g.; this simply caused the child to target a different message. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:38 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | @Flyk: It's not; I'm asking because badp reported having some trouble catching the star active. Honestly, this seems like a fairly minor form of griefing to me, but if it's bugging people then probably worth figuring out some way to mitigate it. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:35 | comment | added | Flyk | @Shog9 why would that be fair on all of the other people minding their own business and chatting? | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:35 | comment | added | badp | @Shog9 Even if it did the timeout just gives this bored 7yo a countdown to precisely the moment where abuse may resume. We are discussing countermeasures but I can't think of anything given the current state of chat. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:35 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | Does putting the room in timeout prevent starring? | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:34 | comment | added | Flyk | @TheGrinch you'd be surprised how annoying it can get after ~20+ minutes of it, since there's no detail on who is starring our moderators can't do anything about it | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:34 | comment | added | fbueckert | Alternatively, a mod/owner ability to see who's starred what would resolve the issue as well, and punish the user for the annoyance. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:31 | comment | added | Mad Scientist | @TheGrinch It also makes the list of starred messages on the right flicker each time the message is starred or unstarred, it's annoying in the way hyperactive animated ads are. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:28 | comment | added | badp | @TheGrinch Yes. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:28 | comment | added | user102937 | Is it really that obnoxious? You must really get mad at the drivers who leave their left blinker on. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 19:26 | history | asked | badp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |