Search ideas
1200 ideas match your query.:
Not if the feature is backwards compatible.
That would mean fetching an idea to compute the path for each hashtag. Overhead?
Reddit is a bit different because they have multiple subreddits/communities, but each community has top-level posts which people can then comment on. They have a completely separate page/UI for top-level posts. And then directly underneath a top-level post, there’s a textarea saying “Join the conversation”.
Could have backwards compatibility for the short version and continue using the hashtag in the UI. Best of both worlds?
That would make idea URLs more meaningful, but there’s something simple and beautiful about the shorter URLs that only have the numeric ID.
The way IG solves this is by rendering the form in a fixed position. It’s still on the bottom but always remains visible.
Use friendly IDs for ideas? A ‘mixture’ where URLs say '/ideas/123-first-30-or-so-chars-of-idea-here'.
Friendly IDs for discussions would be nice. With automatic redirects for numeric ID from legacy links.
All emails have unsubscribe links, but people shouldn’t be able to unsubscribe from system emails like password resets.
Newly added comments keep animating when hidden and then unhidden.
I should revisit this now that I have email infrastructure in place.
See #595. The form for new ideas is pushed to the very bottom of the discussion page. For long discussion, that means users won’t know where to submit new ideas.
Superseded by #1749. This comment was generated automatically.
Each activity should have a distinct HTML title. The browser history and search results in search engines all look the same…
Each activity should have an HTML title. The browser history and search results in search engines all look the same…
Superseded by #1745. This comment was generated automatically.
Sure, philosophers and pedants do. But typically people use the word "know" in situations well short of being absolutely sure.
If we use the correspondence theory of truth, then truth consists of explanations that correspond "perfectly" to reality. In that sense all our statements are false: we don't have those explanations that perfectly correspond, all our actual statements are approximations, or deductions from approximations (1+1=2 is a deduction from a set of explanations, but that set is not entirely true - since the set is inconsistent and incomplete)