# Morrus - How about enabling 'quick post'?



## Decamber (Apr 6, 2002)

Morrus,

On other vB boards, I've seen a very convenient function called 'quick post'. It lets you post an inlay more quickly by the text box at the bottom of the page (at default; I guess you could put it on the upper right-hand corner if you prefer).

How would it be if you enabled the function? Take a look at it at least - it's indeed a time saver.

Thanks,

*Edit:* It's a quick *reply*-function I'm talking about. It's a reply field reduced on lul-lul* that comes with each thread.

* Lul-lul: Juicy functions


----------



## Darkness (Apr 6, 2002)

Come again?


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 6, 2002)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean!


----------



## RangerWickett (Apr 6, 2002)

I'm guessing that he means you'd have a "reply" field on the page with the thread itself, instead of having a separate page.  I personally would find that a little unappealing.


----------



## Decamber (Apr 6, 2002)

Hehe, that's right, Ranger! I guess I was a bit unclear, but hey - it's Saturday - you don't have to be fine tuned at the beginning of the weekend! 

Anyway...
At first, I was a bit uncomfortable with the quick *reply*-function, but once I had played with it for a while, I started to like it. Now I love it.


----------



## Decamber (Apr 6, 2002)

Dang it - the URL I so kindly had posted, was only to be shown for logged in users. Well, here's a screen shot:







THis is the bottom of the page. The text "Snabbsvar" means "quick reply"; "Skicka" and "Rensa" means respectively "Send" and "Reset".


----------



## Morrus (Apr 6, 2002)

Don't know what that is, but it's not part of vB.


----------



## Decamber (Apr 7, 2002)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *Don't know what that is, but it's not part of vB. *




Actually, it is. Well, I don't know whether it's a new function introduced in vB 2.2.2, but I wouldn't think so. Take a look a the image in my previous post, and you will perhaps see what I mean.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 7, 2002)

It's not part of this software.


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 7, 2002)

A full 15% of Decamber's 'not-so-quick-reply' 29 posts are in this thread.  The boards have shown repeatedly that the current server situation can't support additional features.  I fail to see the logic behind the suggestion.


----------



## LeeCHeSSS (Apr 7, 2002)

This quick reply box is a hack attainable on www.vbulletin.org

Actually, this would reduce server load since it won't have to do 20 new queries to bring up a new page when a user wants to reply.

But knowing that Morrus ain't a pro in PHP/mySQL (no offense meant); I doubt we'll see it here.


----------



## Darkness (Apr 7, 2002)

LeeCHeSSS said:
			
		

> *... this would reduce server load since it won't have to do 20 new queries to bring up a new page when a user wants to reply.
> 
> But ... I doubt we'll see it here. *



Well, now. If Morrus decided to install it, I'm sure that, say, Psionicist could explain how it's done.


----------



## Decamber (Apr 7, 2002)

pennywiz said:
			
		

> *A full 15% of Decamber's 'not-so-quick-reply' 29 posts are in this thread. The boards have shown repeatedly that the current server situation can't support additional features. I fail to see the logic behind the suggestion.*




Nice research. 

A full 10% of yours, if we should go on - I really don't see any point in that either. The logic in my suggestion, is explained by LeeCHeSSS.


----------



## LeeCHeSSS (Apr 8, 2002)

Darkness said:
			
		

> *Well, now. If Morrus decided to install it, I'm sure that, say, Psionicist could explain how it's done. *




I could too, but would Morrus trust me - a mere lurker?


----------



## Horacio (Apr 8, 2002)

LeeCHeSSS said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I could too, but would Morrus trust me - a mere lurker?  *




A Netherlander lurker, I would add...


----------



## Morrus (Apr 8, 2002)

You say this will reduce server load - how much of a difference would it make?  And would it definitely make a noticeable difference?


----------



## Umbran (Apr 8, 2002)

LeeCHeSSS said:
			
		

> *
> Actually, this would reduce server load since it won't have to do 20 new queries to bring up a new page when a user wants to reply.
> *




Well, slow down a sec on that analysis.

At the moment, in order to make a reply, the user goes to a new page, thus generating a bunch of queries.  But these _only_ happen when the user wants to reply.  Most users wil read through many pages before generating those queries.

Adding his hack will create less load than the full reply page, but it will add them to _each and every page_ whether or not the user intends to reply.

If the number of views is much greater than the number of replies (which I expect is the case), you aren't necessarily winning, load-wise.


----------



## LeeCHeSSS (Apr 8, 2002)

Your words are true, Umbran. Yes, the quick reply box/button would be showed on every thread-page viewed. However, it doesn't use any mySQL query and only 1 additional php function.

I can't tell how much the view-reply ratio would need to be before they would nullify the benefit of such a hack (php stresses the server far less than mySQL queries do). So in order to find out, you can always try the hack for a while and remove it if it turns out to cause more harm than it brings benefit.

I stand corrected in being too fast with my analysis though.

PS.
I can't tell how much difference it would make, Morrus (there's too much variables to take into account).

PPS.
What's wrong with being *Dutch*, Horacio? I am quite chauvinistic, so beware


----------



## Horacio (Apr 9, 2002)

LeeCHeSSS said:
			
		

> *PPS.
> What's wrong with being Dutch, Horacio? I am quite chauvinistic, so beware  *




Oh, I knew that wans't the correct adjetive... Dutch.
So you are a Dutch lurker...  Well, not anymore, now you are a Dutch poster.


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 10, 2002)

That little hack consumes about 0 resources. It is just a form with a small piece of formatting code, that will transforum you to the "post page", where the info are saved into the database.


----------



## Leopold (Apr 13, 2002)

Psionicist said:
			
		

> *That little hack consumes about 0 resources. It is just a form with a small piece of formatting code, that will transforum you to the "post page", where the info are saved into the database. *





so instead of quering the page again to bring up another page and increase server load, this would take into account said query and load it at the bottom of the page reducing overhead?


I guess this would reduce the page querying by 1 thereby reducing server paging.

Is this an accurate account?


----------



## Heretic Apostate (Apr 13, 2002)

Does this mean that every time we hit "Reply," but decide not to post after all, we're consuming server time?

If so, I sincerely apologize to Morrus.  Many's the time I've hit reply, tried a dozen times to frame a response, and finally given up because I decided my reply wasn't worth the read.

So I'm ashamed to admit, I've been moderating myself.


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 14, 2002)

When you hit the normal reply button, you generate say 5 times as many queries as the number of posts in the thread, as the software have to collect the post (duh!), account information (username), post information (as dates to sort the page by date) and so on.

When you hit the post reply page, the information in the forms you have written, as well as some information you cannot see (php session ID, date and so on) are transfered to one specific page (postreply.php i think). This generates maybe 15 queries as account information, date posted, thread information as smilies and such. 

This means, simply put, that the "new reply" page consumes way more resources than a simple form on the bottom of the page, which consumes zero resources. The quick post thingy is just a form. The "post reply" page is a whole page with DB queries...

You don't have to be a genius to guess how many DB queries you save if at leastt 25% of all posts are posted with the "quick reply" instead of the standard...


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 14, 2002)

Psionicist said:
			
		

> * zero resources*




Why don't the Vb people use it then?


----------



## LeeCHeSSS (Apr 15, 2002)

Because their official forum is to represent the actual software they're selling. If you look at the forums each individual vBulletin developer has, you'll see that THOSE boards are a huge collection of hacks 

And saying "zero resources" is a lie. Ofcourse it uses resources (the webserver has to send a few lines of code extra), but the amount is neglectable.


----------



## Darkness (Apr 15, 2002)

LeeCHeSSS said:
			
		

> *Because their official forum is to represent the actual software they're selling. If you look at the forums each individual vBulletin developer has, you'll see that THOSE boards are a huge collection of hacks *



Are the more useful hacks usually included in the next version of the software?


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 15, 2002)

pennywiz said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Why don't the Vb people use it then? *




Here's is a red ball. Play with it. Why? Because they don't have too with their stable servers, what else? And the fact that it might confuse people when they buy vbulletin and notice that there are no quick reply feature.

You have proven in this thread that you don't know what you are talking about, and just try to annoy people with your useless posts. I don't know who you are, but I don't like you. We are trying to solve a problem here and if you can't participate in the discussion you can get the hell out of here like if I giva a rats ass about it.

The quick reply box is just a textbox and two buttons (as default). We need a more powerful tool to post threads sometimes, to add attachments and such. Talking of which, may I suggest some random admin to disable attachments?


----------



## LeeCHeSSS (Apr 15, 2002)

Darkness said:
			
		

> *Are the more useful hacks usually included in the next version of the software? *




Hacks aren't added in bug-fix releases (1.*.* and 2.*.*), but with version 3 coming up, the developers are indeed hinting that many hacks will become default.


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 15, 2002)

Psionicist said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Here's is a red ball. Play with it. Why? Because they don't have too with their stable servers, what else? And the fact that it might confuse people when they buy vbulletin and notice that there are no quick reply feature.
> 
> ...




Asking a simple question is not rude.  You are being rude.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2002)

Psionicist:

Rude.  Very rude.  Unacceptably rude.  

If you cannot treat your fellow board members with respect, you should not respond.  This is not a "tech-head only" forum.  Nor is it your personal playground, where you get to abuse people whom you do not like.  

Pennywiz asked a legitimate question.  You yourself fail to add to the discussion with rude and insulting behavior.  You also do no good to your own credibility by acting in a childish and elitist manner.  

The proper response to ignorance is education.  If you cannot provide it please be quiet and let someone who has the appropriate temperament provide enlightenment.


----------



## hong (Apr 15, 2002)

Umbran said:
			
		

> *The proper response to ignorance is education.  If you cannot provide it please be quiet and let someone who has the appropriate temperament provide enlightenment. *




True. However, here we have someone who (as far as can be told) doesn't have much of a history on the EN World boards, and who then asks a series of curt, aggressive questions of someone who has. This is not exactly conciliatory or diplomatic behaviour.

Psionicist isn't here to be interrogated on his knowledge of vB, php, or anything else. In fact, IIRC he's shown that he _does_ have quite a strong knowledge of these topics, both here and on the old UBB forums. Now if pennywiz wants to make a useful contribution to this thread, he or she is free to do so. As yet, though, I haven't really seen it.


----------



## hong (Apr 15, 2002)

(Why didn't the post count increment on the main page?)


----------



## Darkness (Apr 15, 2002)

Chill, everyone, drop this issue, and get back on topic, please. Thanks.


----------



## Darkness (Apr 15, 2002)

hong said:
			
		

> *(Why didn't the post count increment on the main page?) *



Which - yours, that of the thread, or that of the board?

Also, did you refresh the page?


----------



## hong (Apr 15, 2002)

Darkness said:
			
		

> *Which - yours, that of the thread, or that of the board?
> 
> Also, did you refresh the page? *




Ah, doesn't matter. The board timed out on me after I clicked the "submit reply" button. Obviously the post made it into the database, but it didn't manage to update the post count for the main forum.

Sorry. I'll stay on topic from now on.


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 15, 2002)

I'll try to stay on topic.

Do the Vb people say what hacks will be in the new software?  I think that will tell you if this is a good hack or a problem hack.


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 15, 2002)

One, I don't regret the meaning of my post. Consult pennywiz's first ignorant reply. If pennywiz here just wrote something like "explain what you mean", instead of directly deniying the possibility of this change, I wouldn't have bothered.

Two, I do regret the insulting part of my post. I overreacted.


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 15, 2002)

hong said:
			
		

> *
> 
> True. However, here we have someone who (as far as can be told) doesn't have much of a history on the EN World boards, and who then asks a series of curt, aggressive questions of someone who has. This is not exactly conciliatory or diplomatic behaviour.
> 
> Psionicist isn't here to be interrogated on his knowledge of vB, php, or anything else. In fact, IIRC he's shown that he _does_ have quite a strong knowledge of these topics, both here and on the old UBB forums. Now if pennywiz wants to make a useful contribution to this thread, he or she is free to do so. As yet, though, I haven't really seen it. *




Thanks Hong. I appreciate that.

Edit: Darkness, I have to defend myself. Case closed, at least for me.


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 16, 2002)

Psionicist said:
			
		

> *One, I don't regret the meaning of my post. Consult pennywiz's first ignorant reply. If pennywiz here just wrote something like "explain what you mean", instead of directly deniying the possibility of this change, I wouldn't have bothered.
> 
> Two, I do regret the insulting part of my post. I overreacted. *




Apology accepted.  Truly, if you have some expertise you could answer a few simple questions.  Do the Vb people say what hacks will be in the new software? I think that will tell you if this is a good hack or a problem hack.  The problem isn't whether I know what you are saying, but if you are in a position to be saying what you are saying with any real authority.  These boards mean a lot to people and to allow their fate to rest in the hands of someone with no business experience would be ludicrous.  How many years in the business world do you possess?  How old are you?  Are you an experinced business person with a background in this field or just a part time individual playing at being an authority?  Tough questions, I am sure, but important considering how you present yourself and how you expect yourself to be perceived.  Long live EN Boards!


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 16, 2002)

pennywiz said:
			
		

> *Apology accepted.  *



Thanks penny. I had an INCREDIBLY bad day yesterday, sorry.



> *Truly, if you have some expertise you could answer a few simple questions.  Do the Vb people say what hacks will be in the new software? I think that will tell you if this is a good hack or a problem hack.  *



Here's an example to describe the problem: Take a car, one of those you find in the dumps. Fix the car. Fix it again and again and again until you have a V8 engine or anything like this, or vBulletin 2.x.x. Oops, the driver (user) found a "bug" in the engine, so the mechanic (programmer) have to fix it. The problem however is the X formed panzer-shell to protect the engine which is difficult to remove... ... ...
The point is that if you build complex software, there are complex problems to take care of. Time consuming problems. The programmers have to improve and better the "core", things you and me won't see. IIRC vBulletin 2.x is 1800kb code, which is alot.
To implant a feature some people won't use is time consuming and not so smart when there are other problems to fix. Because there ARE problems.
The problem is that the "core" is never finished, that's the fun with programming. Optimizing and improving the actual messageboard code, which may result in errors and bugs and so on... Time is the problem.



> *The problem isn't whether I know what you are saying, but if you are in a position to be saying what you are saying with any real authority.  These boards mean a lot to people and to allow their fate to rest in the hands of someone with no business experience would be ludicrous.*



Well, I do have lots of knowledge in computers. I think that's enough.



> *How many years in the business world do you possess?  How old are you?  Are you an experinced business person with a background in this field or just a part time individual playing at being an authority?  Tough questions, I am sure, but important considering how you present yourself and how you expect yourself to be perceived.  *



Years: No idea, Age: 17, Background: The swedish version of master degree in computer science and programming, as well as networking (techincally I'm to young to get one but I got backed up by a psychologist and a former teacher).
As you can see, the problem with computers-knowledge is that you cannot evaluate it based on age/experience/business-experience, when their are dedicated geeks around the world. For one I know a 14 year old boy who works as C++ programmer on a huge company, and makes $6000 per month.



> *Long live EN Boards!  *



Indeed.


----------

