CPCWiki forum

What it says above.


By the way, the paid version is this: SMFPacks Shoutbox Pro (http://www.smfpacks.com/shoutboxmod/) . If people think the features are good, we've had enough donations to get it :)

I don't mind having the shoutbox, but honestly I won't be using it at all.

"Don't care" option added :D

Well, as a source of interesting titbits (by others than me, I may add!) and a place to vent live demoparty issues (I'm looking at you; 4k and 8k PC demo compos), I would (unsurprisingly) prefer that the ShoutBox remains.

I realise this is a games and hardware biased forum and I am nothing more than a "singleton in a crowd", but there's really nothing other than my music releases that I'm (personally) interested in, here. Especially as the CPC demoscene is very secretive and (almost) non-existant (now that P'n'P has shut down); the CPC needs something to keep the whole demo-scene alive!

Also. I'd prefer not to waste the database with numerous demoparty threads that will be dominated by @MaV (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=422), @rexbeng (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=61) and myself... and sometimes @Grim (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=123)! ^_^

If the shoutbox went down on 21st September and it comes back to life 3 days later on the 24th, then it will be the jesus of shoutboxes.

I'm personally not bothered about it either way.

It's still a tie :D

Quote from: Gryzor on 12:20, 23 September 16
It's still a tie :D

Then let me vote twice :)

Bryce.

5-4.

Voted no on this one.
In theory it's a good idea, but in practice, it clutters up the forums front page. There's just not enough people using it to justify it's remaining.


That and many people confuse it for a search engine.


Now that vote could be easily overturned to a yes if there was an option to place it at the bottom of the forum instead with the sounds disabled by default. That would be a better solution.

But... the shoutbox can be collapsed so it only takes up one line...

Actual results look like "shoot box"!  ;D

5-6!

haha...
In this case, it miss the second No option: "I don't want my funds go to the pay version"

That would be either No or Yes.

False, because you add the two yes choice against only one no choice.  ;D
(it is oriented to have more YES than NO ... Logicaly you said right, but peoples are not logical)

What you say is not valid; yes, I know all about bias with multiple questions in polls, but in this case it is not so. It just boils down to yes, no, I don't care. What, do you want me to add a "No, the paid option"? :D

Quote from: Gryzor on 12:55, 23 September 16
But... the shoutbox can be collapsed so it only takes up one line...

Yeah but that's a pain when 1) You're on multiple devices, I work with several different machines and the settings aren't tied to the user, and 2) occasionally I get auto logged out and when I log back in there, it is again. I just think it's a lot less invasive down the bottom rather than up the top.

No, I don't want because it is a biased choice.  ;D

Quote from: Gryzor on 13:10, 23 September 16
What you say is not valid; yes, I know all about bias with multiple questions in polls, but in this case it is not so. It just boils down to yes, no, I don't care. What, do you want me to add a "No, the paid option"? :D

I still don't understand why we don't just add a button to IRC. There are a few CPC IRC channels already that we can just lead visitors to if we're too lazy to create our own.

Then we'll also be ready for when the first CPC IRC client has been coded.  :)

Why would we do that? Ok, I could maybe add a link to the top bar to an irc server/channel... but then we're just doing a links collection :D

Quote from: Gryzor on 13:52, 23 September 16
Why would we do that? Ok, I could maybe add a link to the top bar to an irc server/channel... but then we're just doing a links collection :D

We could embed a javascript client, like this: IndieGameMusic.com - The Music Resource For The Indie Game Developer (http://indiegamemusic.com/chat.php)

Sure, that would be just another page on the server, and I bet it wouldn't be used at all...

Quote from: Gryzor on 13:55, 23 September 16
Sure, that would be just another page on the server, and I bet it wouldn't be used at all...

Well, it would (hopefully) satisfy the few who wants a shoutbox, while removing it from the frontpage, and offer a place on CPCwiki to connect to the CPC IRC channel that'll probably be used more when the first CPC IRC client has been created. It really is a very small page to create, hardly takes up any space. I don't see what the problem is.

Just that it would not be used. Anyone can use IRC anywhere, the issue is not having a chat room somewhere, no matter what, but something integrated. Whether that page was on the cpcwiki server or anywhere else on the web at all would make no difference from the moment it's not integrated...

Quote from: Gryzor on 13:59, 23 September 16
Just that it would not be used. Anyone can use IRC anywhere, the issue is not having a chat room somewhere, no matter what, but something integrated. Whether that page was on the cpcwiki server or anywhere else on the web at all would make no difference from the moment it's not integrated...

IRC?! Great Scott, Marty, back that DeLorean up, we need to reach 88mph!


Seriously who uses IRC today? the same people who listen to Long Wave radio? In the age of the likes of Google Hangouts, Facebook group chats and Skype messaging amongst others, I'm shocked that IRC still exists. There's probably still ICQ clingers on out there too...

Too harsh.


Facebook chats just suck (big), Hangouts and Skype can't even hope to reach the functionality that IRC offers in terms or real-time, anonymous, everybody-welcome interaction.

Sometimes it's better to just decide. ;D

In this case, I wash my hands, because either way people are going to complain :D

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 12:42, 23 September 16
That and many people confuse it for a search engine.

100% agreed. People registers, asks questions in shoutbox instead of taking the time to search and then leave, and repeat this in a loop.

Quote from: Gryzor on 09:40, 23 September 16
What it says above.


By the way, the paid version is this: SMFPacks Shoutbox Pro (http://www.smfpacks.com/shoutboxmod/) . If people think the features are good, we've had enough donations to get it :)

Kill it with fire! Totally useless. People should just use the main forum if they want to chat.


I wanted to show a friend something on here the other night on the Ebay thread via my phone. Couldn't find the thread so I did a search. Yep, I used the Shoutbox even though I am a daily visitor here.


Replace it with a search function which will then encourage people to search for answers instead of asking the same questions about SCART leads and GX4000 PSU's.

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 14:04, 23 September 16IRC?! Great Scott, Marty, back that DeLorean up, we need to reach 88mph!

Seriously who uses IRC today? the same people who listen to Long Wave radio? In the age of the likes of Google Hangouts, Facebook group chats and Skype messaging amongst others, I'm shocked that IRC still exists. There's probably still ICQ clingers on out there too...

You can't seriously argue like this, on a forum about a 30-year old 8-bit computer....

Yes, IRC has actually lost about 60% of its users since 2003, on all networks except Freenode which has had an increase of users for some reason. But IRC is still used by hundreds of thousands of users. Don't forget that all the dating-like chats once took place on IRC. It is mainly these users that has left in favour of other platforms - and us IRC users don't mind that at all.

IRC is a great simple protocol that would make sense to use for the CPC.

And please - don't write something off just because it's old.

Quote from: elanstra on 14:51, 23 September 16

100% agreed. People registers, asks questions in shoutbox instead of taking the time to search and then leave, and repeat this in a loop.

Haven't noticed it, but then again I very seldom use the Shoutbox. But this could be prevented by restricting access to those who have a few posts under their belt, I think.

Quote from: chinnyhill10 on 14:59, 23 September 16

Kill it with fire! Totally useless. People should

Whoa there. People *could*, not *should*.

Quote from: chinnyhill10 on 14:59, 23 September 16
just use the main forum if they want to chat.

Definitely not the same. You can't 'chat' real-time through forum posts.

[/size]

Quote from: chinnyhill10 on 14:59, 23 September 16
I wanted to show a friend something on here the other night on the Ebay thread via my phone. Couldn't find the thread so I did a search. Yep, I used the Shoutbox even though I am a daily visitor here.

Interesting, I believe you :D It's a different theme when it goes to mobile, so I can see that happening...

What if we modified it to be hidden on a per-user level?

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 13:18, 23 September 16

Yeah but that's a pain when 1) You're on multiple devices, I work with several different machines and the settings aren't tied to the user, and 2) occasionally I get auto logged out and when I log back in there, it is again. I just think it's a lot less invasive down the bottom rather than up the top.

By the way, I don't think this happens. I've been looking at it, and it's a cookie thing, so it should stay collapsed on each browser you use and have collapsed it, unless you clean your data.

Quote from: mr_lou on 15:00, 23 September 16
You can't seriously argue like this, on a forum about a 30-year old 8-bit computer....

Yes, IRC has actually lost about 60% of its users since 2003, on all networks except Freenode which has had an increase of users for some reason. But IRC is still used by hundreds of thousands of users. Don't forget that all the dating-like chats once took place on IRC. It is mainly these users that has left in favour of other platforms - and us IRC users don't mind that at all.

IRC is a great simple protocol that would make sense to use for the CPC.

And please - don't write something off just because it's old.

Oh be serious, half of my post was in jest, it was obvious.
I wasn't writing it off because it was old, I was writing it off because in the days of mobile technology, it's outdated and has been replaced with more modern ways of chat. That's not me writing it off either, it's just fact.  :picard:

Having more people on the IRC channels would be nice. Here is an easy link to join us from your web browser, nothing to setup, no account to create: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=%23cpc&uio=d4 (http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=%23cpc&uio=d4)

Can the skype/hangouts/whatever do something this simple?

I'll read you in my IRC client, which I do use a lot. No need to watch the forum webpage anymore. Less wasted time for me  :D

I didn't realise signing up for an account and installing an app was so taxing!  :laugh: :doh:

Wow, you even need to install an app? Sorry, no way that will work on my Symbian phone nor my Haiku PC. No way I can use these fancy and shiny new protocols then.

Quote from: PulkoMandy on 13:55, 25 September 16
Wow, you even need to install an app? Sorry, no way that will work on my Symbian phone nor my Haiku PC. No way I can use these fancy and shiny new protocols then.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Aw man, Haiku. I really wish they'd not dropped the ball on that. I was such a fan of BeOS back in the day.

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 13:52, 25 September 16
I didn't realise signing up for an account and installing an app was so taxing!  :laugh: :doh:

You completely lost me.
No one is complaining about needing to install an app. You need to install an app to go on IRC with your phone too, or install an application on your PC, unless you choose to use one of the web-based HTML5 apps (and you already have a browser installed of course).

I see you're mostly focusing on PC usage here, while one of my primary reasons for recommending IRC, is (apart from the fact that there already exists several CPC channels) that I expect to see an IRC-client for the CPC in the near future, now that the M4 board is here. So it would make sense to use IRC already now, so that when the CPC IRC-client is ready, we can meet "the usual place" from our CPC too.

The IRC protocol is optimal, simple and ideal for the CPC - which obviously doesn't belong in the modern mobile technology category.

And please drop the attitude. You don't see me disrespecting you (or anyone else) like that.

Quote from: mr_lou on 14:16, 25 September 16
You completely lost me.
No one is complaining about needing to install an app. You need to install an app to go on IRC with your phone too, or install an application on your PC, unless you choose to use one of the web-based HTML5 apps (and you already have a browser installed of course).

I see you're mostly focusing on PC usage here, while one of my primary reasons for recommending IRC, is (apart from the fact that there already exists several CPC channels) that I expect to see an IRC-client for the CPC in the near future, now that the M4 board is here. So it would make sense to use IRC already now, so that when the CPC IRC-client is ready, we can meet "the usual place" from our CPC too.

The IRC protocol is optimal, simple and ideal for the CPC - which obviously doesn't belong in the modern mobile technology category.

And please drop the attitude. You don't see me disrespecting you (or anyone else) like that.

That's all well and good, but 1) I was focusing more on mobile usage, as that's where a lot of people focus on and 2) not everyone who posts on the CPC wiki forums connects to the internet with their CPC for text based communication.


As for the attitude, I'd suggest practicing what you preach, not only did you fail to see the humour in my post, but you totally misunderstood the context of it.

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 14:23, 25 September 16
That's all well and good, but 1) I was focusing more on mobile usage, as that's where a lot of people focus on and 2) not everyone who posts on the CPC wiki forums connects to the internet with their CPC for text based communication.

Fair enough. So you're focussing on mobile usage. Fine: There are plenty of IRC apps available for mobile devices, and judging from your previous mocking post that apparently assumed that I didn't want to install an app, you made it pretty clear that you definitely don't mind installing an app. So, problem solved.

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 14:23, 25 September 16
As for the attitude, I'd suggest practicing what you preach, not only did you fail to see the humour in my post, but you totally misunderstood the context of it.

Misunderstanding something isn't an attitude problem. And when you use words like "seriously", you're not making it easy to see that you were just "jesting". In any case, jesting or not, you did mean what you wrote - that IRC was in no way an option. And that was the part I was replying to - not your jesting.
Sorry if you took that the wrong way. I made sure I did not make fun of your opinion, and I did not use any mocking smileys - like you did.

I should add that, since IRC is a protocol, you can start an IRC client and join a channel with a simple IRC link, making access quick and easy from CPCwiki too.


irc://irc-server:port/channel?key


Quote from: mr_lou on 14:37, 25 September 16
Fair enough. So you're focussing on mobile usage. Fine: There are plenty of IRC apps available for mobile devices, and judging from your previous mocking post that apparently assumed that I didn't want to install an app, you made it pretty clear that you definitely don't mind installing an app. So, problem solved.

Misunderstanding something isn't an attitude problem. And when you use words like "seriously", you're not making it easy to see that you were just "jesting". In any case, jesting or not, you did mean what you wrote - that IRC was in no way an option. And that was the part I was replying to - not your jesting.
Sorry if you took that the wrong way. I made sure I did not make fun of your opinion, and I did not use any mocking smileys - like you did.

Oh for the love of god!
The smiles were put in place to ENSURE that I was joking, hence why the laughing one was placed in too.


So before you practice being a wannabe moderator, please bear in mind that I'm not a newbie on this forum. I'm here four years and I don't exactly have a history of offending posters.


Thank you and goodbye.

Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 14:01, 25 September 16

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Aw man, Haiku. I really wish they'd not dropped the ball on that. I was such a fan of BeOS back in the day.

Being a Haiku developer myself, and contributing quite a lot to it, I'm surprised to learn that. Or do you mean the Skype port to it?  :laugh:

Guys, maybe calm down a bit? No reason to get all riled up here :)

Quote from: Gryzor on 16:29, 25 September 16
Guys, maybe calm down a bit? No reason to get all riled up here :)

Exactly what I mean. No need to put on an attitude. And I assure you I am perfectly calm.

People's reactions to opposite opinions frequently puzzles me. I would like to be able to discuss topics here without anyone feeling the need to use degrading comments or disrespectful facepalm smileys, instead of simply sharing their relevant opinion. That's what I want for Christmas.

So, I guess shoutbox is out then? Although I do love IRC, I can't see it being integrated in any meaningful way...


Btw, you guys didn't reply to me regarding the collapsible shoutbox state on mobile screens!

Quote from: Gryzor on 17:21, 25 September 16
So, I guess shoutbox is out then? Although I do love IRC, I can't see it being integrated in any meaningful way...

What's missing? How does your vision look like?

Having a separate page with an IRC implementation means very little; people can go to IRC through any number of pages or programs. Would only be different if I managed to integrate it in the homepage, but I don't see that happening...

Quote from: Gryzor on 17:44, 25 September 16
Having a separate page with an IRC implementation means very little; people can go to IRC through any number of pages or programs. Would only be different if I managed to integrate it in the homepage, but I don't see that happening...

I'm still not clear on what you mean by "integrate".
If you're talking about linking the CPCwiki username to the IRC username, then no, that's not gonna happen.
But if that's a requirement, then you're kinda out of options all together.

I don't think it means very little to offer visitors a chat-page. Chatting is cosy. I don't see how it matters which technology is used, or how many other different ways you can connect to the same chat. The more the merrier I say. Using the approach both me and PulkoMandy linked to allows you to have the chat in a window on the site. And by using IRC you can even provide a link to the IRC URL that launches any locally installed IRC-client and joins the #CPCwiki channel. Multiple ways of entering the same chatroom. I only see advantages all over the place.

But I'll leave it at that now.

Quote from: PulkoMandy on 15:35, 25 September 16

Being a Haiku developer myself, and contributing quite a lot to it, I'm surprised to learn that. Or do you mean the Skype port to it?  :laugh:

Nah, I mean the Mac VMWare images which don't support native sound or modern screen resolutions. At least from the last VMWare image I got from the website about six weeks ago.  ;)

I have sound on one of my machines, and native screen resolution on the other. Do we say both work, or both are unsupported?