How do I look at previous new posts?

[ubeaut]

Part of the problem is is possibly this: Users remain apparently logged on for an hour after they log off. This is set to stop instant updating of who's on line and other logs and forces them update hourly. This saves having a constant load on the server, as instant updates is quite server intensive and slow down the rest of the forums, causing even more complaints.

Cheers - Neil

[joe greiner]

Much appreciated, Neil and Steve.

I asked my younger brother, an IT guru, to have a squint at this thread. Lurking, not a member AFAIK. He pointed out a possible fallacy in trying to modify something as fundamental as the "You last visited" TimeStamp. Although there might be ways to do it, it could involve circular programming. In programming lingo, this is known as a "can of worms." In engineering lingo, it's called a "barrel of snakes."

There's probably a form of the YLV TimeStamp stored in a cookie on each user's computer, even though VBulletin reports "All cookies cleared" at Logout. Evidence, but not proof, exists in the display of Today's Posts when I'm not logged in. Somewhere within such lists, I often see an expression something like "The following threads have not been updated since you last visited." Trying to modify such a cookie value, most likely encrypted, is beyond my ambition.

So, it seems the best way to attack the issue is pretty much to muddle through as I've been proceeding:

For a normal absence of about a day or less, I browse the "New Posts" from oldest first, i.e. from the bottom of the list. Going from newest first had required more regenerations of the search for following pages because the stack had been pushed in the interim; fewer regens the other way.

For a long absence, "New Posts" could be overwhelming. "Today's Posts" is more manageable. If I suspect I've missed something valuable, I just visit each likely sub-forum. Activating subscription on individual threads for future reference isn't such a bad idea either.

It might also be a good idea to record my visits with good ol' paper and pencil, or in a text file. The only complication here is to note which date and time is appropriate. For opposite hemispherian members in particular, the time offset can vary an hour or so each way, because of alternating Standard and Daylight Saving protocols. And I haven't even considered the complication of using a different computer on the road.

Frankly, Steve and Neil, I don't know how you can stand it. I apologise for the distraction, and thanks again.

Joe

[ubeaut]

I hardly ever use New Posts (actually never) but this might be worth a try.

copy this https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t= and keep it.

Open 2 windows in Firefox if you use it (or ie if you must), in one open the New Posts page(s) in the other paste the above into the address box in the first hover over the first post and on the Status bar at the bottom of the screen you will see something like this:
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=76131 go back to the other window and type in 76131 at the end of the address you previously entered hit the enter button and there's your first post. to get the next go back to page 1 again, hover over 2nd post remember the number go back to screen 2 and add that number in place of the last one you added. Etc, etc, etc.....

If you don't get to finish them all in one session you can hover and write down the numbers of those that are left.

Complicated, but simple and pretty well fool proof way of making sure you don't miss a thing.

Cheers - Neil

[joe greiner]

Righto, Neil. I've done it that way too, when pressed for time. But by all means, jot a brief version of the thread title and subforum to confirm why it's of interest - might want to bypass later after all. I also try to maintain a text file of db numbers for threads of interest (mostly my own starts) for reference links in later posts. It's almost unmanageable now, of course, and doesn't get proper attention sometimes. Still a lot faster than "Find all posts by..."

Joe

[ubeaut]

I have just changed the way threads and forums are marked as read to:

Database (automatic forum marking) which uses the database to store thread and forum read times. This allows accurate read markers to be kept indefinitely.

Forums are automatically marked as read when the last new thread is read.

You will probably find all forums will be mostly marked as unread for the next day or so or until you've visited them for the first time. Once you have finished with a forum you can mark it as read in the Forum Tools drop down.

I'm sure you'll all figure it out soon enough.

Cheers - Neil

[Cliff Rogers]

I wondered why I suddenly had posts back to the 14th of July pop up as unread.... just as well I don't remember reading them already.

[joe greiner]

I guess/HOPE this is also why New Posts found 496, of which only about 140 were actually New. I didn't notice whether the older ones were un-highlighted, but I didn't actually examine the list for that. The "You last visited" time was consistent with the standard intermediate advisory, something like "The following threads have not been ...," which occurred just around the YLV time. I did a manual logout on the previous session BTW.

Joe

[steven]

I guess/HOPE this is also why New Posts found 496, of which only about 140 were actually New. I didn't notice whether the older ones were un-highlighted, but I didn't actually examine the list for that. The "You last visited" time was consistent with the standard intermediate advisory, something like "The following threads have not been ...," which occurred just around the YLV time. I did a manual logout on the previous session BTW.

Joe

Hi

New posts will only display new posts, so the 496 should be threads with posts you haven't read.

[joe greiner]

Hi

New posts will only display new posts, so the 496 should be threads with posts you haven't read.

I'm not so sure about that, Steve. A second boink on New Posts (to update) still got 496, but with some added newer posts from the first list, and the advisory was still in the earlier location. I suspect 496 is some sort of a default cutoff, or maybe just a coincidence. God knows how the advisory gets invoked. I've seen it before in lurking mode, so I'd thought it must come from a cookie on my computer. That's why I'm skeptical about "ALL cookies cleared" at manual logout. I haven't tried lurking from a mate's (non-member) computer, though. Sticking with Firefox OR IE seems to provide some consistency, but using both is a zoo.

Might have to visit the VBforum again. But I'm not a member there (and probably shouldn't want to be). And/or hit our FAQ's for more enlightenment.

I scan the New Posts list in reverse chronological order to reduce regens, so I bypassed (+/-) the later threads entitled "New Posts," but they didn't seem to offer much more info. I'll have another look momentarily.

Joe

[steven]

I'm not so sure about that, Steve. A second boink on New Posts (to update) still got 496, but with some added newer posts from the first list, and the advisory was still in the earlier location. I suspect 496 is some sort of a default cutoff, or maybe just a coincidence.

The max number of results we have set is 500 results.

If you do a 'new posts' search and click on a thread title, then do the same search again (click the new posts link) the theread title you clicked on shouldn't be visible, unless you're viewing a cached version of the search result page.

[joe greiner]

The max number of results we have set is 500 results.

If you do a 'new posts' search and click on a thread title, then do the same search again (click the new posts link) the theread title you clicked on shouldn't be visible, unless you're viewing a cached version of the search result page.

Something still haywire, Steve. Might be on my end, of course. But I did a manual logout, visited another forum, and then re-logged in. The YLV was the same as the recent logout, so at least that variable is identified as the time of last logout. Even so, I still get 496 hits from New Posts, even with a reload of the index page and the New Posts.

The advisory "The threads below have not been updated since your last visit but still contain unread posts" is now consistent with the new YLV, but didn't show your post at all. Could be a matter of split-second timing, though, because the times were identical. This is a potential hiccup in any kind of Boolean analysis over a continuous function. Less than x, and greater than x, don't cover the continuum. For full coverage, one of them should be (less/greater) than or equal to x; if both of them are (l/g) or equal, there's duplication. This only explains the absence of your post, so you might want to examine the coding for that.

My overabundance of New Posts seems to about the same as Ray's at http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com...ad.php?t=76237

IIRC, the only way I've previously seen the advisory was in lurking mode (i.e. not logged in, but from a single computer), or if using Today's Posts (24 hours).

Joe