Idiot Guest Shouters

[roger]

mossy, why do you need to log out before you hit the X?

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by roger

mossy, why do you need to log out before you hit the X?

I think she was just saying that was one choice. If she's not logged in, all she has to do is hit the x. If you're not logged in you don't need to log out. but you knew that.

Thank you for posting Mossy. For some reason there was a perception that I did not support logging in. I do. However, think about this everyone:

If you need to log in to shout, when you shout we all know who it is - your name is on the shout, shout let it on out (oops I just foreshadowed my next show...tonight there will be details).

I see no need to put on the main page who is logged in. It's really not a necessity. Why not just say how many are logged in? Mossy is exactly right when a) if you're not there and logged in it looks like you're ignoring people, and 2) the name stays on. I've logged out and seen my name on there later also.

So can we just require log-ins and not have the names up and just do it?

[mossy]

Hi roger, actually it's not the logging out, it's the logging in LOL!!

Rick, I think you like to do it properly and log out completely. I just use the "x" and close the browser.

I like Rick's idea of not having the list of people who are online, because often I don't have time to chat, I only have time to look and see what everyone else is chatting about. Being on the list but not saying anything feels rude and I'd rather not be on it when I only have time to lurk.

If I remember correctly, we never used to list who was in black, we only listed who was in white and the forums.

This is all getting a bit detailed for the capacity of my brain, but this is what I support for what it's worth:

Logging in to use everything on the site including black

Doing away with the list of who's online

By the end of this thread KW will be drowning himself down at his local

Originally Posted by mossy

By the end of this thread KW will be drowning himself down at his local

Scott me up Beamy.

[dinosaur]

Log-in required: Yes.
Removing list: Yes. (I tend to lurk a lot and I apologize for my rudeness.)
Scott me up, too, Beamy!

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by dinosaur

Log-in required: Yes.
Removing list: Yes. (I tend to lurk a lot and I apologize for my rudeness.)
Scott me up, too, Beamy!

Again, then just don't log in.


The who's on line list will remain. It's little more than an extrapolation of the info that was always available within the forum.

Making logging in a requirement is looking like it will become policy. If you log in, you will be listed.

[eloy1964]

mines a pint of bitter!

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by mossy

Hi roger, actually it's not the logging out, it's the logging in LOL!!

Rick, I think you like to do it properly and log out completely. I just use the "x" and close the browser.

I like Rick's idea of not having the list of people who are online, because often I don't have time to chat, I only have time to look and see what everyone else is chatting about. Being on the list but not saying anything feels rude and I'd rather not be on it when I only have time to lurk.

Then don't log in.

[mossy]

You're automatically logged in, and show in the list of who's online if you're responding to something in the forums.

Woj's idea of having a hide option is good, imho.

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by mossy

You're automatically logged in, and show in the list of who's online if you're responding to something in the forums.

Woj's idea of having a hide option is good, imho.

Then we're back to the issue from the old site... two separate logins to one site. Oh no, that is not going to be.