If a thread has more posts then a profile selectable maximum, the software is supposed to show the original post and the most recent "n" posts where "n" is another user selectable value. The message...

Only the first post and the last 75 posts (of the 192 posts in this thread) are displayed.
Click here to also display the remaining posts

... appears at the site of the "cut". The actual values obviously depend on the users settings.

If you have the message board options set to display the oldest post first and the newer ones continuing downwards, (as is a more natural way IMHO), the forum does not adjust, instead it shows the 75 oldest posts, cuts the more recent ones and just leaves the most recent post showing.

An example can be seen here.

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

I just tested it there. The problem with that thread is that the last 'recent' post before the final 3 is from the 3rd of November 2007, then it has one of the 23rd of February 2008, two of the 25th of February 2008.

It shows that same way when using the 'cut-off' option and when looking at all the posts in the thread. So I don't see the problem in that thread.

---

So you are telling me that it is correct that I see the 75 oldest posts in the thread and a single post, the newest? If that is how it is supposed to work then it is completely daft! The last 2 posts made, (25th), are comments relating to the post made on the 23rd, yet when viewing the topic I see posts up to 11th April 2006 then nothing until the second post made today.

Even the message I quoted above says "Only the first post and the last 75 posts (of the 192 posts in this thread) are displayed" that is not what I am seeing at all. I see the 75 oldest posts and a single new one.

Are you looking at it with the correct ordering in your "Community preferences"?

Threads: Most recent reply
Posts: Least recent post
Jump to first new post in thread automatically
Do not reorder sticky posts
100 If a thread contains more than this number of posts
75 only display the first one and this many of the last ones

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

Threads: Most recent reply

Yep

Posts: Least recent post

Yep

Jump to first new post in thread automatically

Yep

Do not reorder sticky posts

Nope (as in not checked)

100 If a thread contains more than this number of posts
75 only display the first one and this many of the last ones

Yep and yep.

What I then see is, first post:
Posted 15 Mar 2006 23:18:46 UTC

First post after the cut-off:
Posted 12 Jan 2007 21:47:17 UTC - in response to Message ID 34596

Probably 73 posts in between, I didn't count them.

Last post:
Posted 25 Feb 2008 18:55:46 UTC

---

On this forum the show first/cut/last 75 works correctly at the moment:

http://boinc.berkeley.edu/dev/forum_thread.php?id=1809

But the Rosetta thread where I have no account shows me posts up to and including 3 Nov, then only the last three February posts. I can't see the 12 Jan post and because I have no Rosetta account I can't make it display. The cut is clearly in the wrong place. Everyone normally wants to see all the most recent posts.

Why is the cut 3 before the end, not 1 before the end? Another mystery.

Somebody somewhere probably hasn't understood that the bizarre bit of Boincspeak 'least recent post' actually means 'oldest post'.

This thread on a CPDN forum also displays wrongly, but the cut is before the one last post. It's a big nuisance. Some people will spend time looking for posts they had read previously and now can't find. (Yes, I know many of us over there need new glasses!)

http://cpdnbeta.oerc.ox.ac.uk/forum_thread.php?id=2&nowrap=true

What I see is the posts 15th March 2006 up to 11th April 2006, the cut, then a single post dated 25th Februuary 2008.

-------------------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------

Trimmed for sanity but hopefully retaining the salient features.

I agree with Maureen, the "least recent" is a very odd way of saying "oldest".

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

Maybe it's a browser thing. Which browser(s) do you use and see this in?

---

I cut that picture out at home this morning from IE7 on XP. I see it exactly the same at work with IE7 and FireFox on XP and Konqueror on SuSE 10 Linux. I don't have Opera here, but will look at home when I get there, (4-5 hours time).

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

I didn't see it in mo.v's thread either. Even told her there what I saw.
Firefox 2.0.0.12 in use here.

I did clear my browsing history, cache and authenticated sessions about a week ago. Perhaps that's the first thing to try.

To double check, settings are least recent reply first, both in the preferences and in the forums. Even in the thread preview underneath the answer window, did I see the correct order.

So it's difficult for me to make a Trac ticket out of it if I can't replicate it. You could make a ticket out of it already, though.

---

I am still at work so don't have access to my webserver to post pictures right now.

On the forum page, here, I have the option, upper right by the "Sort" button set to "Most recent reply first". What I take that to mean is that the the thread with the newest post will be at the top of the list of threads, just beneath the stickies. The thread with the next newest thread will be below that etc.

In my "Community preferences" I have a drop down list box called "Threads" which has the same value "Most recent reply first".

In the next drop down list box called "Posts", I have "Least recent post first". I take that to mean the oldest post in the thread. It is what I am actually seeing.

Neither "Jump to first..." or "Do not reorder stickies" are checked. I don't like the "junp to first" feature so do not have it enabled, the other, I have never changed and am not sure what it does.

I then have 100 and 75 in the 2 other boxes in that order. If > 100 show 75.

The result is the picture I showed above. I very much doubt it is a browser cache artifact. I have never looked at that site with Konqueror before - I very rarely use the Linux machine for anything other then cross compiling our embedded applications.

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

Ahh! I just discovered something. If I go to the thread there is an sort box there as well. It was also set to "Least recent post first". Out of pig headedness, I changed it to "Most recent post first" and clicked "Sort".

As expected, the order changed but the cut stayed exactly where it was, i.e. I could see the latest 75 posts in reverse chronological order scrolling down, then the cut, and then the single original post. Okay, as it says on the box, no surprise.

Here is where it gets interesting. When I changed it back, the order of the posts reversed as expected, BUT the cut point moved, and is now correctly under the original post, and the thread shows the latest, (I'm guessing - I didn't count), 75. In other words it is showing correct.

Even more interesting, I then opened Konqueror on the SuSE box and called up the page - no cache cleaning, no trickery, nothing, just called it up, and now it is showing correct there as well.

I assume from this that something on the server was screwed, and that flipping back and forth in that "Sort" box has set it right.

Maureen, you want to try that and see if it does the same for you?

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

Hiya

As I said before, I have no Rosetta account to log into. Viewing with IE.

With 'Least recent post first' I see

15 March 2006 through to 27 June 2007 then 3 Nov 2007. No cut message to click.
23 Feb.
25 Feb.
25 Feb.

I sort to 'Most recent post first'. I see the exact reverse ie no cut message to click and posts I know are there still hidden from me.

I re-sort to 'Least recent post first'. Everything reverses again and is now exactly the same as when I first looked at the thread this afternoon. No cut message to click, at least one post I know is there (the January one) still hidden from me.

So re-sorting the post order hasn't put things right for me. I'm not a demented avenger but I do feel demented. Something really is wrong if there's no mechanism for displaying all the posts in a thread.

How about in your example thread at CPDN?

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

To show it here as well, the CPDN thead as I see it with the least recent post first option:

Image of top of thread
Image of bottom of thread

---

I see no cut at all?

Top of thread

Bottom of thread

Community preferences

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

How about in your example thread at CPDN?

This is the thread:

http://cpdnbeta.oerc.ox.ac.uk/forum_thread.php?id=2

Logged in there, I can correct the cut and make it display in its proper place after post #1 using the same trick you used at Rosetta ie changing the post order then changing it back again.

It would be interesting to see how it displays for you, assuming you have no CPDN beta2 account.

That is the thread I pasted pictures of earlier. I did not realise that was a CPDN-Beta thread. I don't have an account there which is possibly why I do not see a cut at all. I assume I have no account, therefore I have no Community Preferences so it defaults to displaying everything - that is quite reasonable if you think about it.

The issue would then appear to be genuine, and in cases where the viewer does have an account, has it set the way we have it, and has not altered it. The switch to/from the other sort order jogs something at the server into taking the correct action.

Could be that members of projects that have been around for a long time, maybe since before the option was available, are getting the defaults set up in their preferences, but some initialisation is missing. I know I haven't fiddled with my forum settings at Rosetta for years.

The fact that both of us have seen this, with the same settings, and have fixed it in the same way is pretty telling.

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

Adrian, the URLs on your images say "&nowrap=true", that's why you cannot see a cut.

I think it's a (latent) caching problem of the browser. I throw my cache/cookies/history away at regular intervals, hence why I don't see that on any forums you send me to.

With either of you resetting your preferences and it then showing up correctly, it seems to be the caching/cookie that's setting the preferences that's doing it.

I'll ask David to make a detour by this thread to confirm or renounce my suspicions. ;-)

---

Adrian, the URLs on your images say "&nowrap=true", that's why you cannot see a cut.

But that is not something I am doing. Perhaps that is what it defaults to if it can't find a cookie.

With either of you resetting your preferences and it then showing up correctly, it seems to be the caching/cookie that's setting the preferences that's doing it.

I did clear all my cookies on this machine a few weeks ago because another forum had an issue.

I also do not believe I have ever looked at any BOINC project site with Konqueror on the SuSE box, so there wouldn't be any cookies there to cache. Can't swear to it, but I really don't think so.

---

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.