NEW! Google Custom Search

Loading

how to go directly to the new replies

mireille_c's picture

I'm wondering too. (post #67716, reply #1 of 27)

I'm wondering too.

AnnL's picture

Clicking on New posts only (post #67716, reply #4 of 27)

Clicking on New posts only brings you to the FIRST new post in a thread. You then have to scroll through to find all the other new ones.

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

cyalexa's picture

Hi Ann, On my computer, when (post #67716, reply #10 of 27)

Hi Ann,

On my computer, when I am in the "home" view and I click on the orange (#new) in the column on the left hand side of the screen all the new messages, and only the new messages appear. I guess things are working differently for different people. I think that's odd but I really don't understand how computers work. Hang in there!

ETA - you probably have to be logged in

Barbara48's picture

Now I understand. i was so (post #67716, reply #22 of 27)

Now I understand. i was so confused/. I kept thinking I had read the reply and it was not new. They have to be able to fix this. Also,no spell checker in this day and age?Very odd.

FL.Cook's picture

Don't you have spell check on (post #67716, reply #25 of 27)

Don't you have spell check on your computer? I couldn't be without it, as I am the worlds worst speller!!

Carole
AnnL's picture

Clicking on New posts only (post #67716, reply #5 of 27)

Clicking on New posts only brings you to the FIRST new post in a thread. You then have to scroll through to find all the other new ones.

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

kathymcmo's picture

AND you have to memorize how (post #67716, reply #23 of 27)

AND you have to memorize how many new posts there were noted in the navigation bar, and count them as you go or otherwise scroll through the entire thread. Because they are spread out all over depending which post they were replying too. Sometimes you have to sort through multiple pages to see them all.

StevenHB's picture

This could be solved by (post #67716, reply #26 of 27)

This could be solved by having a label like "New!" on every post that is new to the current reader.

Without coffee, chocolate, and beer, in that order, life as we know it would not be possible
AnnL's picture

They do have a small red New (post #67716, reply #27 of 27)

They do have a small red New label on each New post. However, since the new posts can be interspersed in between old posts, one has to scroll through potentially dozens, maybe hundreds of old posts looking for the New ones. If there are 5 news ones in a thread of over 100 posts, do you really want to scroll through all 100 posts if the New ones are among the first 10?

Also, I just figured out yesterday that the New label is only for the FIRST page that you read in a thread. So, if there are 5 new posts, 2 on the first page, 1 on the second page and 1 on the third page, you'll only see the New label for the two posts on the third page. When you go to the second page, it thinks you're read the post already, even though you couldn't possibly have.

This just keeps getting worse.

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

FL.Cook's picture

Unfortunately some of the NEW (post #67716, reply #16 of 27)

Unfortunately some of the NEW replies were from Nov. 20th. Not very new to me!!

Carole
ashleyd's picture

On the Discussions in the (post #67716, reply #2 of 27)

On the Discussions in the left side bar it says Topic n replies (x new). If you click on new it takes you to unread messages in that thread.

Age is unimportant unless you’re a cheese.

Syrah's picture

It doesn't seem to always. (post #67716, reply #3 of 27)

It doesn't seem to always. Perhaps the kinks are still being ironed out?

"Life is not easy for any of us. But what of that? We must have perseverance and, above all, confidence in ourselves. We must believe that we are gifted for something, and that this thing, at whatever cost, must be obtained." -Marie Curie

ashleyd's picture

Yes, very strange, sometimes (post #67716, reply #6 of 27)

Yes, very strange, sometimes the replies are in chronological order, other times they appear in other places, there must be some kind of logic but I haven't figure it out yet.

Age is unimportant unless you’re a cheese.

AnnL's picture

They're in (I think reverse) (post #67716, reply #7 of 27)

They're in (I think reverse) chronological order under the original post that each post is replying to. So, this post will appear directly under yours. If someone else comes along and replies to your post, I think it will show up before mine but after yours. If they reply to my post, it will be under my post.

That's my best guess. :-)

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

Syrah's picture

No Ann, I'm under you. (post #67716, reply #9 of 27)

No Ann, I'm under you.

"Life is not easy for any of us. But what of that? We must have perseverance and, above all, confidence in ourselves. We must believe that we are gifted for something, and that this thing, at whatever cost, must be obtained." -Marie Curie

AnnL's picture

Ok, just get rid of the (post #67716, reply #12 of 27)

Ok, just get rid of the reverse and my post is correct. :-)

Posts are in chronological order under the post they're replying to. Each reply is SLIGHTLY indented under the post it's replying tp. So slight as to be almost not noticeable.

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

Syrah's picture

I'm replying to Ashley to (post #67716, reply #8 of 27)

I'm replying to Ashley to check out Ann's theory.

"Life is not easy for any of us. But what of that? We must have perseverance and, above all, confidence in ourselves. We must believe that we are gifted for something, and that this thing, at whatever cost, must be obtained." -Marie Curie

MadMom's picture

Since when? I only get the (post #67716, reply #11 of 27)

Since when? I only get the first new message, then have to scroll through x messages hoping to spot the "new" in the upper left hand corner. It would be nice if it did just show the new ones. Of course, we would still have no idea whom they're replying to. Sort of like adding a message...do you reply to the last message in the line or what? No longer able to reply to specific messages or people or to ALL.

SallyBR1's picture

Honestly, folks - I am trying (post #67716, reply #13 of 27)

Honestly, folks - I am trying hard.

but I do feel like shedding a few tears.

AnnL's picture

You're not alone Sally! (post #67716, reply #14 of 27)

You're not alone Sally!

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

AnnL's picture

OK, just discovered that WAY (post #67716, reply #15 of 27)

OK, just discovered that WAY up in the top left colum, there is a little box, with your user name in the title bar. In that box is Home, Add Forum Topic, My Profile, etc. If you click on Recent Replies, it will show ALL recent (I don't know what they are considering recent) replies.

The problems with this is that it's just a list of ALL recent replies from different threads. I don't normally read every thread, so that will be a lot more reading than I'm used to/have time/interest for.

The good thing is that you can click on the "topic" link at the top of each new post and it will take you to the post that it's replying to. Well, I don't know if it will take you to the specific post it's replying to or just to the thread. Haven't played with it enough.

ETA: I just tested it on my own Reply and it takes you back to the FIRST post in the thread. Which isn't at all useful, because then you have to scroll through all the freakin' posts to first find the Recent post you were just reading and then figure out which post it was Replying to.

This is just totally worthless.

Ann
"The elders were wise.  They knew that man's heart, away from nature, becomes hard; they knew that lack of respect for growing, living things, soon led to lack of respect for humans, too."  Chief Luther Standing Bear, Lakota Sioux

MEANCHEF's picture

Yes, the recent replies (post #67716, reply #17 of 27)

Yes, the recent replies section is totally worthless.

Another quirk: if you go to "home" and look at the list of "Discussions" like Ipke, Equipment, etc, it says how many new replies there are. Then if you click on the "Discussion" you get all of the threads in that discussion each with its "new replies". The trouble is that the number of "new replies" in each case are different. Something is very wrong.

kathymcmo's picture

Something is wrong, MeanChef, (post #67716, reply #18 of 27)

Something is wrong, MeanChef, because several times now I've used the "new" link from the Discussions bar to take me to, say the three new replies. I eventually find all through by scrolling down, down, down, but along the way scrolling down and back up to the top I find a lot of replies that I've never read, but are not marked new. So something's screwy.

Gretchen's picture

If you ever opened that (post #67716, reply #19 of 27)

If you ever opened that thread, it marks all the posts as read. Maybe that is the reason. It is the only way to wipe out the "old" memory (since it didn't remember what ones I had already read) and try to start over, I THINK.

Gretchen
Adele's picture

All I can say is with all the (post #67716, reply #20 of 27)

All I can say is with all the baking cookie making being done in the next week or so (and today) this is bad timing. I'm not sure how to search anymore. Looking for biscotti recipes.

But, but, it's SUPPOSED to taste like that!

Syrah's picture

I was thinking the same thing (post #67716, reply #24 of 27)

I was thinking the same thing Adele. Someone gave me some tips for making marshmallows. NFI how to find that thread/post again now. :-(

"Life is not easy for any of us. But what of that? We must have perseverance and, above all, confidence in ourselves. We must believe that we are gifted for something, and that this thing, at whatever cost, must be obtained." -Marie Curie

MEANCHEF's picture

It is actually a very bad (post #67716, reply #21 of 27)

It is actually a very bad feature to "mark as read" everything new in a discussion just because you open the discussion. This will cause many people to miss a lot of posts.