Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Wazoo

new link up top

Recommended Posts

Although I've been told that I have "complete" access to the Forum sever, it really doesn't work like that <g> It's taken me all afternoon, part of the evening to get this Modification installed, and I see that there us still a bit of work on the 'skin' ... at present, only I can add stuff to it, which is another time and effort thing ...

Here's where it's at ....

The Forum version of the SpamCop FAQ started with snagging the data from the www.spamcop.net click and chase the links version, converting that to a single-page access version. Time matched on, I and the Moderators went with adding in additional entries wherever we found the data, sometimes stolen from traffic elsewhere, sometimes created by an issue, sometimes the input came from other users, on and on ....

Historically, the www.spamcop.net FAQ has always been under fire for being hard to navigate, incomplete, always behind ...(just a few of the complaints) ... the attempt at the single-page access point version here is self-described as a quick hack in lieu of something else .... well, here's a shot at that something else ....

It's going to take a while to populate it for a number of reasons (beyond that it's onlly allowing Admin access to create entries at this point);

E-mail Account entries for example .... current Forum version of the SpamCop FAQ is primarily the 'first-level of the www.spamcop.net FAQ ... and those entries mostly contain links to web pages actually done up by JT ... so am sittng here wondering why I'd need to follow that flow ... so I've been entering in the query, then entering in a copy of the web-page contents directly ... the catch is that the formatting has to be changed to look OK here .... none of the items posted thus far come close to a cut/paste operation ....

Although this thing offers a multitude of options on "sorting" entered items, not yet sure how to end up with a 'good' entry list .... the www.spamcop.net was comlained about as one had to know what one was actually looking for to guess which link to click on next .... the Forum version was complained about because it wasn't sorted or organized (?) (Dang, I tried <g>) .... So things will probably change as this gets played with, maybe something as silly as numbering entries ...????

Anyway, many things yet to do, but .... before I spend yet another eternity on trying to get it populated, any one care to jump in yet again with something better than "it sucks" ...????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Took me a bit to figure out what you were talking about, but when I did, I liked what I saw.

The specific reference is to the "FAQ" link in the main menu bar which is located at the far right hand edge of the bar, next to "calendar"

Clicking on that with take you to the new FAQ layout.

If you are looking for the complete FAQ please continue to use the link located in the pinned items at the top of each of the various forums or click on the following link: Original SpamCop FAQ & Added Forum Items, Never up to date, changes often.

Wazoo, I like the general layout.

One question, the navigation section on the right(that is left) hand side shows the list of main catagories using the standard arrow indicator for expand and reduce the display

When you enter one of the catagories it changes to bold type and the arrow changes to a downward direction but does not expand the entries to the next sublevel. I would hope that further development would include the ability to expand the entries as well as the option to click on the arrow to reverse its direction.

If you are looking for critical comment on individual entries I would suggest the following change in the password problems article: current:

If you've truly forgotten your password, there's nothing for it but to contact Jeff, the owner of the email service, by writing to him here: support [at] spamcop.net

Suggested change:

If you've truly forgotten your password, the only way to reset it is to contact Jeff, the owner of the email service, by writing to him here: support [at] spamcop.net

Wazoo, would you prefer that specific comments related to specific articles be entered as comments at the end of each article or as additional posts to this topic?

Edit: thanks Farelf for the correction, seems like I can't tell my left from my right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wazoo, I like the general layout.

One question, the navigation section on the right hand side shows the list of main catagories using the standard arrow indicator for expand and reduce the display

When you enter one of the catagories it changes to bold type and the arrow changes to a downward direction but does not expand the entries to the next sublevel.  I would hope that further development would include the ability to expand the entries as well as the option to click on the arrow to reverse its direction.

The actual code hasn't been totally looked at. There was some postive commentary on IPB, Invisionize, etc. ... was a bit put off by the Demo links pointing to the author's site (another person posting the "where is it?" question was answered with the "look around a bit" response .... I spent over 45 minutes and I never found it ..??) the last bug-fix was quite a while ago ... so not sure what all is actually available .. for example, that left menu has an option to be used with java scri_pt or not (currently set to java scri_pt) .. haven't toyed with that to see what the difference is ...??? ..... a bit later, check the Help for Adbue-desk entry .... sub-entries show up there ....

If you are looking for critical comment on individual entries I would suggest the following change in the password problems article: current:

If you've truly forgotten your password, there's nothing for it but to contact Jeff, the owner of the email service, by writing to him here: support [at] spamcop.net

Man, I've already been hammered pretty quickly in the newsgroups on that very entry already yet another FAQ attempt ... let me say this .. that was copied directly from http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1001 which has been linked to from the Forum version of the SpamCop FAQ for a long, long time <g> Would say that both your suggestions and the newsgroup suggestions should probably start by being entered there and (hopefully) get some wordsmithing done on a final ....

From appearances, not only do I need to work on form and layout, but will be held accountable for content also ... would it help to point out that I went to toss something into the microwave to stop that hungry feeling, opened the door, and had to set what I had in my hands down ... there were the three potatos I'd put in there last night/this morning to handle those last hungry moments ...????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness (& dbiel), I just couldn't find it - guess I'd make a lousy frog (don't like flies anyway). So I guess, despite "prime page location", visibility could be a problem. Any chance of another color to show this FAQ is the master FAQ (once it is "fully" populated)?

One question, the navigation section on the right hand side shows the list of main catagories using the standard arrow indicator for expand and reduce the display ...

34034[/snapback]

Would that be your "other right"?

Definitely worth further effort IMO, also I note NG entries are reasonably supportive at this stage. Worth having dbiel's caution on FAQ coverage/changeable nature, assuming the link will remain in place from here on in and until update capability is established.

Edited by Farelf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would that be your "other right"?

34042[/snapback]

What can I say. Cross eyed? or just not thinking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From appearances, not only do I need to work on form and layout, but will be held accountable for content also ...
Your original question left me a bit unsure if you were asking general layout guestions and/or content question. So was just trying to get a feel for what you were asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, all points are valid .... just after all the time spent on getting the mechanics down, some of the visuals fixed, editing and reformatting, on and on, it was a bit staggering that the content of one of the items chosen to throw in some filler material just so there'd be something to look at is what grabbed the most attention <g> That it turned out to written by Don so many moons ago made it all the more 'interesting' <g>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can only imagine the effort involved, but concentration on the content is the intended payoff so evidently it is working very well. The more outdated factoids initially highlighted the better (and if getting them corrected is an issue, all the better to emphasize that need along the way). Gotta stay positive, yes? Failing to attain that mindset, as I quoted in a recent PM to someone else "Enemies strengthen you." (Frank Herbert's God Emperor of Dune - a bit of recycled Nietzsche, maybe), the next line is "Allies weaken." Can't lose :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, where I'm strugglong now .. well, a couple of places <g>

1. the copy/cut/paste thing has got me a bit screwed a bit on some pages that refer back to a www.spamcop.net FAQ entry that also include a scri_pt used to "make contact" with someone about a specific issue ... The actual scri_pt is hidden away on that server ... I could probably replicate some/most/all os that, but at present, not sure what addresses are actually used behind the scri_pt ... that the stuff would be seen coming from this server and not www.spamcop.net might get someone excited .... up in the air on this thing right now ...

2. the killer aspect .. where I was "happy" to keep sliding things in under the major headings on the Forum version (thought some attempt at organizing was done, even sub-titles were inserted, but...) ... how to align which items into what sub-category is really causing a bit too much work right now (have to name a new category, find the spot to place it, set the permissions, pick which items are to be an 'article' under that category, set up that title, position it, insert a "who wrote it" entry, go get the data, insert it, edit/manipulate it to 'look' right, save that away, then decide what item/entry to walk through next ... and no doubt making it sound easy here <g>) ...

3. I see that there's a 'sort' mode of using "most viewed" .. which looks interesting until someone asks what idiot wrote a Chapter 1 through 9 thing, but it comes up listed in the order of Chapter 7,5,2,9,4 ....????

anyway, just a few thoughts while I'm (possibly) coherent ...???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, where I'm strugglong now .. well, a couple of places <g>...

34049[/snapback]

Sounds horrendous - maybe the hierarchy/categorization thing could be farmed out a bit (work area/subforum with outline for "others" to set up and beat into shape by consensus with links to present source) - essentially it sounds like way too much for one person. Isn't it becoming clear that it might have to be limited to a "first immediate action" set of hotpoints, at least in the first instance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wazoo, I beginning to see some of the issues you have been dealing with as to how the code functions differently than you would expect as it is being adjusted by html command strings buried deep within the page definition file.

Sorry I miss read your initial post.

From what I have seen, this new layout is a great improvement over the previous and should make navigation much easier. I am going to try a hunting expedition to see if I can locate one piece of buried code that should fix one problem that I have seen. Will post later when I track it down. You have enough issues that you are currently working on so I am not going to share this one until I can also share the answer as to how to fix it. I have already broken it apart for the definition strings and found that it displays quite differently on its own. So off to the hunt.

PS my special thanks to Farelf for your insight, helped me see things differently. Thanks also for your many recent posts from down under. Hope your winter was not to severe and that you are enjoying the start of spring as we Northerners are making our move into Fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds horrendous - maybe the hierarchy/categorization thing could be farmed out a bit (work area/subforum with outline for "others" to set up and beat into shape by consensus with links to present source) -

small hint - a post made to bring the issue to the light of day <g> .. love the catch you made, reinforcing the "other" part of the story <g>

essentially it sounds like way too much for one person.  Isn't it becoming clear that it might have to be limited to a "first immediate action" set of hotpoints, at least in the first instance?

34050[/snapback]

Yeah, but .. that also goes back to how things how sorted ... I have it set to the Topic ID right now, so it's pretty much going to show things in the order I add them, thus making that "what or which one next" all that much more 'fun' ...

Wazoo, I beginning to see some of the issues you have been dealing with as to how the code functions differently than you would expect as it is being adjusted by html command strings buried deep within the page definition file.

Why am I suspecting you might be talking about Forum Faq entries? I went with blind trust there, simply copying the data over .. I remember thinking I was going to have to hit them all anyway later based on previous experience with a couple of other items, the "page title" showing up too many times, and in bold. no less ... but I pretty much just tossed those pages into place ... again, to get something in there so that the overall structure could be seen and touched ...

Sorry I miss read your initial post.

??? I asked for input, you did that. Unanticipated were the two rapid shots across the bow on the same entry, grabbed as it was 'safe' (no comments following that post) ...

From what I have seen, this new layout is a great improvement over the previous and should make navigation much easier.

I think I said somewhere that in a change from the Forum version, I'm going with inserting the actual page contents here. However, I already know that this may not be the "best" solution, running the same old problem that there's no tracking option on the www.spamcop.net FAQ pages and we all know that every now and then, some of those pages change. I know that the majority of the last changes were in reaction to my queries/suggestions, but even those changes were accomplished with no fanfare .. but this is the standard problem with running multiple copies of a changing document ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I haven't had a chance to review it yet. Perhaps later or tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am going to try a hunting expedition to see if I can locate one piece of buried code that should fix one problem that I have seen. 

34055[/snapback]

Although the tag on the box says "will accept HTML and BBCode" .. I'm guessing it was the pips that you are talking about ... changed your HTML;

< img src = 'style_images/1/pip.gif' border='0' alt='*' / >

to BBCode;

[ img]http:// forum.spamcop.net/forums/style_images/1/pip.gif[ /img]

(hopefully munged enough not to be rendered)

However, for some reason the last line simply refused to render the code, simply displaying the BBCode itself ... so dropped that last row of pips for now ....???

Noticed the bad line-wrapping going on, so had to modify the titles a bit on a couple of them ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My comment for now is, don't worry so much about the content, there are plenty of us to pick away on that. Concentrate on the skelleton. I think you are on the right track.

By the way, stop guessing. I am going to try to search this one myself. If / when I find the answer, then I will expain more. Till then, I am sure you have more than enough to work on that is far more important that my picky little details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While inputting more stuff, one of those thoughts came up .. am adding in a line at the bottom showing the Source: of the content inserted .... one, gets the monkey off my back a bit, two, makes it easy to do a compare for any discrepancies, three, points to where the 'problem' needs to be fixed ...???? Like the "How do I sign up - reporting" .. I combined both "free" and "Premium" on one page (and now remember that I forgot to add the "Report-Only" definition in there somewhere .. dang it! I can't recall the "Premium" description used anywhere else.)

BTW: the current 'layout' looks like;

Overview of SpamCop Services
    Those pesky &amp; geeky details (Some Definitions, some Explanations, some Scenarios)
SpamCop Parsing &amp; Reporting Service
    Parsing Issues
    Reporting Issues
    Reporting by E-mail issues
    Browser Issues
SpamCop Email System &amp; Accounts
    Sign-up, connect to, management
SpamCop Blocking List Service
General Information about SpamCop
Help for abuse-desks &amp; administrators
    Help with SpamCop reports and spam in general
    Interacting with SpamCop and it's users
    Assistance stopping spam
SpamCop Forum
General Information about spam
Other Data, Tools &amp; Lists

Maybe I need to go back the last time I started this FAQ thing here ... once upon a time there was a lot of work expended on that version .... why didn't that cross my mind earlier?

Edit a bit later: .. one reason is that it was buried over in the lounge area ... made a bit of a collection of some historical items ....

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2221

SpamCop FAQ problem

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=858

Possible WebMail FAQ

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2308

FAQ and pinned items

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1672

Forum configuration, additions, changes, input requested

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3486

Forum configuration, additions, changes, input requested

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=4706

Newsgroups vs Forum, an on going battle, Hidden newsgroups

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=4329

yet another war of words, NNTP versus Forum

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=4994

Forums vs. Newsgroups, Is there a better way?

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=4881

Forum / FAQ / data changes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course, always making more work for myself <g>

From: "Wazoo"

To: "SpamCop Support - JT"

Cc: "SpamCop, Deputies"

Subject: out of date web-page

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:33:29 -0500

I have no idea where it's linked from, but one of the

Moderators put it into the (Forum) SpamCop

Glossary .... it's a good entry page, so also used

it in the Knowledgebase application I installed into

the Forum .... Page with bad data is found at;

http://news.spamcop.net/ (I actually think he messed

up on a news://news.spancop.net link, but ....)

Issue is the top-left graphic on that page, calling for

http://206.55.64.142/spamcop/images/newlogo.jpg

suggesting changing to the link;

http://www.spamcop.net/images/05logo.png

(Though noting that http://www.spamcop.net/images/newlogo.jpg

does also exist and is a 'good' graphic.)

Note the copyright line:

Copyright © 1998-2000 Julian Haight, Jeff Tucker. All rights reserved

I'm going with the "shared" server concept here, but

assuming it's on JT's side ..???

The knowledgebase article can be seen at;

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?act=faq&article=20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far the new FAQ looks good to me.

I followed the D2-FAQ link to http://www.dscripting.com/, but couldn't find an explanation of who they are or what it does. What's the story on them, Wazoo? How did you hear about them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The IPB web-site had a list of suggested/recommended third-party resource sites. The largest/most-active of these sites is 'the' spot to pick up modification tools, files provided by other folks. The dscripting site is Dean's own site for providing support for those mods and tools he's written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A note to those wishing to add comments to the new FAQ.

Unlike the regular forum posts, once a comment is posted, it can not be edited or deleted by the poster; so be sure to carefully proof read your comment before clicking on the <input type="submit" value="Add Comment"> button.

Wazoo, what is your feelings about users adding comments.

Would it be better if they were added to this topic with a referece back to the article, or posted as a comment within the article itself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wazoo, what is your feelings about users adding comments.

Would it be better if they were added to this topic with a referece back to the article, or posted as a comment within the article itself?

34381[/snapback]

Lots of complaints on the support forum for this application. As you mentioned, there is no edit capability for Comments. Basically, the only offered solution for a "problem" comment is to do a deletion of the comment via an SQL query. By extension, I would say that indicates that a 'correction' could be accomplished, but again, it would have to be via an SQL query. To be honest, not a hell of a lot of fun from this keyboard.

There was an "e-mail this article" function. First of all, my test showed that it didn't actually work. Well, it did send an e-mail, but ... forgot to actually add the FAQ data into the body that was never created ... the funny part was reading all the comments in the code, where he was bad-mouthing Matt's forum e-mail code, stripping out all that was un-needed, etc. The first thing I noticed was that he also didn't add in the stuff I and a couple of other guys worked out a long while back while tryng to work the "seen as spam" issue (code was added into the next update of the IPB Forum app) ... things like the lack of a Date: line for instance ... anyway, the thoughts of opening up a possibility of someone sending e-mail where one input the "from address" the "To: address" a "Subject Line:" comment (and of course topped by the fact that there wasn't a body) .... I took that option out ...

There is an option to "rate" an entry ... has its place in some areas I suppose, but hardly applicable here .. that option is not allowed, but I see that the skin code needs to be 'touched' to knock those exiting star displays off the screen .... will get around to that eventually ...

Let me just say that additional comments haven't hit the top of the list yet ... some of the existing FAQ entries are simply driving me nuts in trying to figure out how to 'convert' them .... I just found that link to http://news.spamcop.net existing on the SpamCop Email System Members Page .. which is noted (and JT notified) that the Forum isn't mentioned, still pointing to the spamcop.mail newshroup as the primary source of support .. hardly matching the "newsgroup is going away" note of 2 (?) years back ....this one makes #37 in the list of "can't do that one yet" ... (though in all fairness, some of the www.spamcop.net FAQ entries have been recently 'touched' in response to my latest flurry of e-mails on this stuff ....

so for anyone stilll "here" ... I'd suggest going along with dbiel's suggestion and continue to march on with the "build the content here" scenario ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wazoo, what is your feelings about users adding comments.

Would it be better if they were added to this topic with a referece back to the article, or posted as a comment within the article itself?

34381[/snapback]

Wow, problem demonstrated .. it was via an SQL query that I saw that a comment had been entered onto one of those FAQ entries (maybe just prior to dbiel asking this question?) .... no obvious clue that there was an addition/comment made, in this case, the comment was about a link, so there was a clue as to where to look for it ... yep, any correction stuff should be 'here' (or at the "source" referenced) ... thanks in advance ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wazoo, could you change the source link to:

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...topic=4473#rDNS

Thank you.

Tried it (again) .. Currently blaming in on all the HTML/BBCode/HTML conversion stuff ... the anchor link didn't fly, still dropped me onto the top of the referenced page ... IE6, FF1.07

Query: delete FROM ipb_faq_comments where cid='2'

Executed Successfully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for trying and thanks for the information about comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for trying and thanks for the information about comments.

34554[/snapback]

Going to have to re-look at this yet again .. noticed this morning that the anchor links in http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?act=faq&article=20 are working as intended/expected ....????

Fixed ....

The URI was simply a bit of text .. had to actually code it in as a URL so that the anchor tag was actually passed to the browser correctly ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×