|
Grex > Coop7 > #135: Changing some party settings |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 109 responses total. |
mdw
|
|
response 25 of 109:
| 
Jan 15 13:28 UTC 1996 |
I think it would be reasonable to make a distinction between
things that are user-interface issues (such as spaceonly & firstchar)
or "showread"
things that are visible to other users, such as being able
to read files, change one's name, make noises, etc.
For the user-interface things, kbd line > env > chantab > partytab
that is, the user should have final say over his own
personal "stuff".
For the visible-to-other things, chantab > partytab > kbd line > env is
ok.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 26 of 109:
|
Jan 15 14:25 UTC 1996 |
I'd put the change into the chantab and not the partytab so that people could
go to other channels for "refuge" from the new settings, if they didn't want
to use them. However, I hadn't realized that the chantab settings weren't
overrideable. I've moved the settings from the chantab to the partytab, so
they are now in all channels, and you can use the PARTYOPTS environment
variable to override them.
|
brighn
|
|
response 27 of 109:
|
Jan 15 19:48 UTC 1996 |
This is the second time in recent memory that a change has been
insituted in Party that caused much bedlam because the bugs hadn't
been considered... the other (that I recall) was when Ryan and Jazz
and some other naughty children were hacking private channels so those
had to be modified. I'm glad the error has been changed, and I thank
Jan for being such a nice guy and putting up with some rather hostile
comments that should have been directed at someone else (although Jan
didn't know *who* we should yell at, and Nephi kept telling us to yell
at Jan).
I think this is a rather major change for the number of voices that
commented on it. I do recall (selena doesn't... but maybe that's
the result of *another* party glitch) seeing a note that Valerie was
*thinking* about making this change and if users were interested they
could pop in and talk about it. But frankly *I* think (not that I have
any say around here anyway, but I'm entitled to an opinion. :) that
Partyers should have been given a stronger notice that unless they said
something these changes *would* go into effect. Jan last night on party
seemed to be of the opinion that this issue had had a concensus reached...
what, about half a dozen people here, most of them baffers? The majority
of the partyers last night were clearly bothered by the change, and
Nephi's attitude was a bit snotty (Well, convince *me* that it's better
to press the space bar... what's wrong with you guys anyway?)... granted,
Selena was more than a little hostile, but it didn't feel like anybody
(myself included) was being very co-operative (All things considered,
Jan was being much more cooperative than could be expected).
At any rate, Party now works for me the way it used to, but it seems
that if it's an issue of setting PARTYOPTS, it should be the people
who don't like the status quo who should have to manually change
their settings. It doesn't seem very fair that those of us who
*loved* the status quo have to manually change settings (granted,
one time only, but it's still a pain) because people who for the
most part aren't regular party users (the only real regular I recall
seeing in the 26 items above was arthurp...) don't like the status
quo. Sorry, but that feels like baffers pushing their weight around.
And yes, I hear the counterarguments already: we were given fair
warning (no, IMHO, we were given scant warning), this is a public
item and a public conference (that's read primarily by baffers and
haqrs, and at any rate the only time i read it is when i'm specifically
called in usually by a friend... many of the posters here, especially
mdw, are openly hostile to me and i don't like the aggravation), this
was a consensus decision (26 posts doth not a consensus make), and so
on... as for Selena and me, hopefully it will work right now...
I *do* like the file read prohibition, btw. I just don't like
the other settings.
|
janc
|
|
response 28 of 109:
|
Jan 15 22:05 UTC 1996 |
All changes are hated by a significant fraction of users. When we move
to the Sun 4, all sorts of things we didn't anticipate are going to go
wrong and some users will scream and complain. We are going to move
anyway.
This is a very complex system. When we change things, things will go wrong.
We count on the users letting us know about problems, and we try to be
diligent about putting them right. Sure its an inconvenience for the users,
but we like to assume that most of the users recognize that the staff are
volunteers too, and that giving them a bit of help in figuring out what is
what on the system is the civilized thing to do. I'd like to thank brighn
and selena for their help in documenting these problems. I can't fix
things if people don't complain.
If the complaints take the form of flames, I honestly don't care, so long as
they have enough specific detail to allow me to figure out exactly what the
problem is. I tend to wonder what such people are thinking of, but if you
like my program enough to go off the deep end when it changes that's OK
too.
And no, I don't think the users should have sole say over how the system is
set up. The users, by definition, pretty much like it the way it is. I'm
at least as interested in non-users, who tried it, hated it, and went away.
|
davel
|
|
response 29 of 109:
|
Jan 15 22:42 UTC 1996 |
How should partiers be given more notice? I suspect that if things were
posted where they have to see them, in the party motd thing (whatever
it's called), whenever any change at all is being contemplated, there
would be an incredible amount of complaining about how long it all
takes to scroll by. Had this particular change been so announced, I have
to wonder how many people really would have objected in advance - i.e.,
how many people would have read it carefully enough to figure out what
actual impact it would have on *them*. In general it's kind of hard to
know what kind of notice is appropriate. If you give too many
announcements, most people just stop seeing any of them.
|
mta
|
|
response 30 of 109:
|
Jan 16 00:33 UTC 1996 |
It seems to me that it might be time for an MOTD to run for a while telling
people that if they want a say in how the system is run, they have to come
to co-op and take part in the discussions. By definition, the staff can't
query every user of everything they want or need to change before they "mess
with the status quo". Yeah, OK, this conference isn't everyone's idea of a
good time, but it is here to let users have a voice in running the system.
Otherwise the staff could/would just do as they pleased and the users could
lump it.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 31 of 109:
|
Jan 16 03:49 UTC 1996 |
Brighn, I apologize. I should have given people more notice before
I changed those settings. I'm sorry to have upset you. I do, however,
continue to think this is a change for the better in the long run.
|
scg
|
|
response 32 of 109:
|
Jan 16 04:32 UTC 1996 |
I should have suggested this earlier, but I got distracted and didn't realize
that these changes were still being considered. I'm wondering if it would
have been better to change it just for new people, while leaving it the way
it's been for older users, who have presumably already learned the old way
of doing things. That's what was done with some rather significant PicoSpan
configuration changes a while back, and it would probably have been a better
way to do things here.
As I said earlier in this item, I think this was a bad change to make. Still,
enough other people seem to think they're a good idea that I'll go along with
them and just change it back for myself, as well as suggesting that other
people make the changes for themselves.
|
brighn
|
|
response 33 of 109:
|
Jan 16 05:19 UTC 1996 |
Dave L> Agreed. That's a problem, too. I'm not suggesting every teeny
change that comes along be announced in screaming flashing neon. But
that means that someone has to decide which changes are important enough
to ask users about, and which ones aren't (and which changes are so damned
relevant and important that user permission is irrelevant... the private
channel reads, for instance. "Hey, Partyers, due to a problem with the
software, haqrs with good timing can read private channel logs... do yu
think we should modify Party so that's not possible anymore?"). And
yeah, Jan, people are going to bitch no matter what... it's complicated.
*shrug* I would've suggested Steve's idea too, had I thought to come
read this item when Valerie announced it.
Ah well, ...
|
scg
|
|
response 34 of 109:
|
Jan 16 05:31 UTC 1996 |
I just spent some time in party, where there was logs of complaining about
the changes, while nobody sounded very appreciative. Then, there were lots
of experienced users typing things like "q" and "w" into the channel, when
they meant them as commands. It doesn't look like this is making things
easier for experienced party users; it looks like it's having the opposite
effect. At this point, since people haven't had time to get used to them yet,
it would probably be a good thing to decide we've made a mistake and back the
changes out, before doing so would leave people thoroughly confused. If we
don't do that, the least we could do is put some instructions for how to fix
it (yes, to a lot of people who knew how to use it the old way, it is now
broken) along with the announcement that it has changed.
I also hope that one of our staff members isn't usually nearly as
condescending in his responses to user complaints as he was in the response
from him that I saw. "You just think you don't like it" really isn't a way
to respond to complaints.
|
selena
|
|
response 35 of 109:
|
Jan 16 08:29 UTC 1996 |
Thank you, scg! This is the thanks I get for leaving coop, so you
guys don't have to put up with me? I'll have you know I was *asked* to
leave coop by two people at once, and, that once, I felt obliging. I
figured, if anything this major were to come down, it'd be put into
the REAL motd that there was something needing attention in here,
like there is with almost anything else.
But, when I logged in last night, the MOTD was full of
silly things- the book sale, for example, and not a damn PEEP about
these modifications! If you did something this major to picospan,
I'm sure it'd be all over the place, making sure everyone knew!
But, no, it's just party, and anyway, it's for their own good, so
why would they complain? Bullshit! I want this GONE.
|
remmers
|
|
response 36 of 109:
|
Jan 16 10:55 UTC 1996 |
Another data point: I just tried out party for the first time since
the changes went into effect and believe I like the new way better.
Didn't take me much time at all to get used to not hitting the
space bar. At this point I'd vote for keeping the change.
(It occurs to me that if it had been set up this way all along
and somebody suddenly changed it to require hitting the space
bar, I'd think it *exceptionally* strange and irritating.)
|
popcorn
|
|
response 37 of 109:
|
Jan 16 15:15 UTC 1996 |
Re 35: Rather than clutter the regular motd with it, I've been putting
announcements about party in the party motd, so that only partiers see it.
When you run party, the party motd tells you about the new configuration.
|
mta
|
|
response 38 of 109:
|
Jan 16 21:10 UTC 1996 |
Is it hard to back it out now and implement it as Steve suggested in #32?
And if you do that, how do I implemeent the new way with having to run
newuser???
|
carson
|
|
response 39 of 109:
|
Jan 16 22:23 UTC 1996 |
(hmm.. haven't been in party since the changes. I wonder what the
hubbub is about.) 8)
|
adbarr
|
|
response 40 of 109:
|
Jan 17 00:27 UTC 1996 |
Yeah. Is "Party" really all that controversial? Goodness gracious! Me oh
my.
|
janc
|
|
response 41 of 109:
|
Jan 17 01:02 UTC 1996 |
Frankly, I don't think this is a big change. If you type space before your
response, your text ends up being displayed with an extra space in front of
it. The "q" no longer works to exit party. You need to use ":q", control-D,
or control-C.
Typing "w" never did anything in party, so I'm not sure why people would be
typing that now.
This isn't the sort of thing that is going to throw everyone hopelessly into
confusion. I've made much bigger changes to party, and probably will again.
|
sidhe
|
|
response 42 of 109:
|
Jan 17 01:17 UTC 1996 |
Excuse me.
What are the exact changes I need to make to reestablish party's
proper (old) settings for myself? I do not want to use it until I am
assured proper performance, and I don't at all appreciate the swiftness,
and then the condecendence, behind these changes. The only part I
agree with is the disallowed reading of files into the main channel.
Why, you may ask, do I want the settings to remain consistant? Simple.
I use grex and M-net's party programs, and this makes it very difficult
when navigating between the two, as M-net's party is still on the
better of the two setups.
|
scg
|
|
response 43 of 109:
|
Jan 17 03:37 UTC 1996 |
To fix it now, put the following line in your .login:
setenv PARTYOPTS "spaceonly nofirstchar"
If it gets fixed, and you like the way it's set now:
setenv PARTYOPTS "nospaceonly firstchar"
It seems to me that once people are used to something, it probably doesn't
do us much good to change it without a good reason. I think we've been over
this before with arguments about changing the command for entering items in
PicoSpan, and decided that it was better to leave well enough alone, rather
than make everybody relearn stuff. We've even followed that when it came to
changing something as simple as the PicoSpan prompt, changing it only for new
people and not for current users. Why not do the same thing with party?
Current users who like the new way better can always change their own
settings.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 44 of 109:
|
Jan 17 06:08 UTC 1996 |
#43 works if your shell is csh, menu, lynx, or tcsh. If your shell is bbs
(sidhe's shell is), or sh or bash, or if you don't have a shell, you need to
edit your .profile file and add a line that says:
PARTYOPTS="spaceonly nofirstchar" ; export PARTYOPTS
|
selena
|
|
response 45 of 109:
|
Jan 17 07:25 UTC 1996 |
What scg says is not only good procedure, it's also a hell
of a lot less rude than having your party settings upheaved.
|
brighn
|
|
response 46 of 109:
|
Jan 17 17:24 UTC 1996 |
I notice non-party users ar having difficulty understanding why we're so upset.
One is privacy. Let's say I wanted to send a note to popcorn privately
to explain why carson is publicly insulting her on the main channel.
Let's further say I was a dufus and mistyped it, say, forgetting the
bang. The command, as most anybody who's in here should know, is
!tel popcorn
If I type tel popcorn by mistake, with the old settings, I get
threelines of Type ? for help, enough warning that I've screwed up.
With the new settings, I get:
brighn: tel popcorn
Now carson knows that I'm interceding and proceeds to rip me apart,
as well. (I chose carson for this example because he isn't hostile,
btw...)
(The first way, if I don't catch it from the Type ? for help lines,
all I get is
brighn: popcorn
which looks innocuously stupid.)
And I agree with selena about the relative importance of notices.
There are seven notices in the current login. One is about USenet
news, which Grex hasn't had in a year, at least, to my knowledge.
One is about Gaylord Grexers *possibly* getting together...
the weekend is passed, so the one about the AA Library BookSale is
gone.
Yes, I know it's a different MOTD. But get-togethers warrant constant
reminders (everytime we log on), but major changes in settings don't?
Odd priorities, especially wen half of the baffers don't seem to give
a care about the human element and socializing. OR is it that IRL
socializing is healthy and on-line socializing is twisted anyhow?
Sorry, it is hard not to read this as a value judgement, especially
when I see SOME of the baffers more involved in IRL events than on
Party (robh being the only real exception that leaps to mind...).
Ah well, we all have our priorities. And I have my settings back to
what they're supposed to be....
|
chelsea
|
|
response 47 of 109:
|
Jan 17 18:52 UTC 1996 |
Ya'll shouldn't look at this change as staff's pejorative
futzing but rather as unsolicited nurturing.
That will help. ;-)
|
arianna
|
|
response 48 of 109:
|
Jan 17 21:47 UTC 1996 |
<Erinn agrees with Mary.>
As a regular partyer, I tend to agree with the statement that we did not
get enough notice to the changes. The only advice *I* can give (considering
that I know next to nothing compared to most in this item,) is that what could
have been done (and what could be done in the future,) was to leave a message
at the entrance to party. Most chat line junkies who come here will never
touch the co-op item. (Unfortunately; I hate to think that all one would want
to do here is be a Slug.)
Another suggestion: create a file that we can !cat for ourselves that tells
us (in plain English,please <= ) how to fix the party settings if you are
so adamant on keeping them. Once again, not everyone reads the co-op.
Thanx, and have a nice day. <=
|
popcorn
|
|
response 49 of 109:
|
Jan 18 03:23 UTC 1996 |
Good idea! I've created a script people can use to go back to the old party
settings. Type "!old_party" to run it. That makes a permanent change to your
.login or .profile file, which takes effect the next time you log in.
|