Silver Wolf Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 👍 Can now post and view images Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Stephenson Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Brave Browser is good for getting rid of annoyances. I understand it blocks those ads at the beginning and partway through YT videos and sends cookies off in random directions to render them ineffective. It's not the best browser but it's good for some sites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ashby - Moderator Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 The tech response I've rec'd is... "We have implemented Cookie consent module that appeared to be blocking something that was required, there's an issue with it not remembering peoples selections that I'm waiting for a response from the vendors support on." That must be the little blue disc that's now appearing bottom left. Hopefully just a short term niggle. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Gray Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Well at least I can now add a reply! Thanks David. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedBaron Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Dear Moderators Please could you tell the forum fiddlers not to fiddle with an online live system. It does not take a lot of imagination to understand that fiddling should only be done with an off-line test system. If a fiddler fiddles and seriously damages a live system then the rule is do not go home until a working backup version has been reinstalled At about mid night yesterday, not only did we still have the silly pop ups, it was also not possible to post and also when hovering the mouse over a members button at left the post/rep information did not pop-up All of this is quite indefensible for anyone claiming to be a programmer. This knowledge was available back in the mid/late 1950s. There should not be any short term niggles if people are working correctly. To me it sounds like a major failure not an STN. I think that we the paying members deserve to be warned in advance of any silly fiddle and told what is changing. It would be even better if ALL potential changes were put to a members vote before implementing. If as David suggests this is a vendor problem then stop paying the vendor and find some professional to do the job. Thank you RedBaron 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff S Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Having done a fair bit of low level (assembler/ 'C' etc) programming myself some years back, I agree with Red Baron. However, we've still got the annoying Cookie reminder every time we change a page view. I often found that when I deleted code I'd written but couldn't see why I'd done it in the first place that I discovered its purpose and quickly reinstated it 🙂 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Kearsley Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Are we paying members? I don't pay any subs but I can still access the forum. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Cooper Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Let's hope the problem is fixed soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Me to. Just added another section re this.Please get rid of it ASAP Bas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 It seems pretty clear to anyone who has even a basic understanding of IT protocol that this is a backend issue, and the vendors server has a frequency block imposed on this particular website. I learned as long ago as 1965 that the easy remedy for most such problems is to re establish a hyperlink with the appropriate server, so that the frontend of the positronic path is effectively bypassed, and we can all get back to normal...Problem solved ernie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Swearing won't get things resolved, issues being worked on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Futura57 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 46 minutes ago, RedBaron said: Dear Moderators Please could you tell the forum fiddlers not to fiddle with an online live system. It does not take a lot of imagination to understand that fiddling should only be done with an off-line test system. If a fiddler fiddles and seriously damages a live system then the rule is do not go home until a working backup version has been reinstalled At about mid night yesterday, not only did we still have the silly pop ups, it was also not possible to post and also when hovering the mouse over a members button at left the post/rep information did not pop-up All of this is quite indefensible for anyone claiming to be a programmer. This knowledge was available back in the mid/late 1950s. There should not be any short term niggles if people are working correctly. To me it sounds like a major failure not an STN. I think that we the paying members deserve to be warned in advance of any silly fiddle and told what is changing. It would be even better if ALL potential changes were put to a members vote before implementing. If as David suggests this is a vendor problem then stop paying the vendor and find some professional to do the job. Thank you RedBaron I agree 100% this is completely unacceptable for a live system. Someone in IT needs to be fired. From a lifetime in IT, middle managers often have bonuses based on pushing out 'upgrades' even though the programmers know a release isn't ready. Speculation in my part of course. But they should also be able to back out a change and restore the previous version toot-sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, RedBaron said: I think that we the paying members deserve to be warned in advance Well we don't actually pay money unless we buy RCME but the contributors provide the content which gives the site something to attract advertisers so I suppose contributors 'pay' by contributing their expertise. Lets face it there is a huge amount of expertise available here on the forum. We need this forum but the forum is nothing without it's contributors! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outrunner Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 You think this is bad, I used to frequent the Model Engineer forum (also Morton's) the ME site now it has been updated is dire and understandably the users are throwing thier toys out. The ME forum has become the worst forum site I have ever visited and very rarely go there now. Probably the same techies that run this place too. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin b Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 On 04/01/2024 at 13:43, john stones 1 - Moderator said: Been noted, patience whilst sorted please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin b Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just now, kevin b said: 🤣 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyGnome Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 2 hours ago, Futura57 said: I agree 100% this is completely unacceptable for a live system. Someone in IT needs to be fired. From a lifetime in IT, middle managers often have bonuses based on pushing out 'upgrades' even though the programmers know a release isn't ready. Speculation in my part of course. But they should also be able to back out a change and restore the previous version toot-sweet. Annoying, but not unacceptable on something we get free. Someone should be fired? For making a mistake? Seriously? I also spent a life (35 years) in IT, and no middle managers ever got bonuses based on pushing out upgrades that weren't ready...... that would be called Underperforming........ I'm sure they'll fix it when they can. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 3 hours ago, Ernie said: It seems pretty clear to anyone who has even a basic understanding of IT protocol that this is a backend issue, and the vendors server has a frequency block imposed on this particular website. I learned as long ago as 1965 that the easy remedy for most such problems is to re establish a hyperlink with the appropriate server, so that the frontend of the positronic path is effectively bypassed, and we can all get back to normal...Problem solved ernie Any chance of that in English Ernie. I can code but buts goobldy gook to moi. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 I think it’s intended to be humourous as positronic is either a company name or something from science fiction - plus hyperlinks weren’t developed until the mid eighties. Some very unusual usage of other terms too…but as I was studying the Beano in 1965 I may have missed their context! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 On 04/01/2024 at 13:46, Don Fry said: I don’t normally moan but that is mind numbing awful and annoying. Be grateful I suppose, that the techie is writing code here, and not a nuclear power plant. I’m off till it’s fixed. Thing is, nuclear power plant quality software costs a bit much. We never have the forum if we wanted that. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Chaddock Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 I must congratulate RCME for the speed they addressed the "unable to post" issue due to the "small reply box" presented at the bottom of each page, it was less than 1 character deep! I had to email RCME as I couldn't report the problem to the web site! It appeared at the same time as the privacy notice addition so this is my first post since then. More a comment than a grumble but the "privacy" update situation does rather show what a relatively innocent change can lead to. It is hard to believe the repeated "pop up" did no show in testing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin b Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 16 minutes ago, Simon Chaddock said: More a comment than a grumble but the "privacy" update situation does rather show what a relatively innocent change can lead to. It is hard to believe the repeated "pop up" did no show in testing. That's an assumption Simon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff S Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, Nigel R said: Thing is, nuclear power plant quality software costs a bit much. We never have the forum if we wanted that. The Post Office Horizon software supplied by Fujitsu cost a billion pounds according to the ITV programme 'Mr Bates versus the Post Office' and no-one has disputed the cost so I assume it's correct. That caused a lot more problems than the one we're complaining about. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedBaron Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 If the silly little blue button for consent preferences at lower left is part of the cause of the pop-up problem I would recommend getting rid of it as it seems to provide no useful function. Most/all other websites handle this matter much more discretely. Though I guess the vendor has gone home for the week end? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Green Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) Isn't today the last day of Christmas, the 'season of goodwill' - and you lot want blood because theres a clicky thing on your toybox? 😂 Edited January 5 by Phil Green 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.