Become a Podshock Supporting Subscriber
Now more than ever, we need your support! Become a Supporting Subscriber today.

Recent comments


  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

     

    Any idea what that last double quote symbol (underneath the Omega symbol) means?

    Citations went away. They should be gone now as it didn't seem to serve any purpose if the final result was simply italicized text.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Trying the Rich Editor - Playing with it - for fun :-)

    Here's a recent picture from my weekend paper - as a 'test image'

    EDIT - Not 'upload' an image but link to one already up.

    Unsung Hero

     

    Cheers, daveac

     

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Please investigate a forum plugin, I'm sure we'd all chip in if cost is an issue. At the moment I'm liking the new site in general a lot more but the new forum a lot less.

    Just my two pennies!

    Thanks

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Yeah, in the end, the citation results in just italicizing.. It should just go away as it will only add to the confusion.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    The double quotation marks are only grayed until you select some text. Once you select text, it becomes available. It is used to make "citations"

    This is an example of a citation.

    I am not sure if it would be of any use.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Yeah, I see the <b> was being filtered out in the Filtered HTML input setting. I don't know why the software was set like that as a default, I added the <b> for that input format now. So it should not be filtered out as it was before for the "Filtered HTML" input format.

    Hence, these are the kind of bumps that need to be ironed out.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    I don't think the Rich Editor option was turned on for authenticated users. My bad. It should be available now under "Input format"

     

    Ahhh, there it is.  And there's a quoting facility, even if it's hardly intuitive, and doesn't link the quote to the name of the quoter.  But man, this is a tiny, tiny font which defaults in this rich text editor.  Any idea what that last double quote symbol (underneath the Omega symbol) means?  Mine's greyed out, so it's impossible to tell.

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    You should see it now. I thought it was set up to be available after one registers on the site. Sorry.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    I don't think the Rich Editor option was turned on for authenticated users. My bad. It should be available now under "Input format"

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    You've completely lost me, Louis. Not seeing this "rich/WYSIWYG editor" option anywhere. Also this sentence is in bold, using the b tag. So why isn't the b tag working? Also, I have NO idea how you're interjecting code, cause this is what happens when I use the code tag: This text enclosed in () tags. The entirety of that was enclosed in cite tags and there's a cite tag in the parentheses.

  • (SPOILER) Possible Weddings in "Doctor Who"?   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Yes, please use spoiler warnings, spacing, white text, etc. when needed. I didn't have a chance to recreate the guidelines from our previous site to this site on that matter yet.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Oh, I forgot to menition, if you are not using the Rich Editor, you can use <b> for bold instead of <strong>. Both HTML tags will work.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    You can use the WYSIWYG editor, choose input format and you will have the option of using a "Rich Editor" where you can choose to your colour text if you like. You can even use white: so you can't read this here unless you highlight it. <-- white text.

    As I explained in ther postings, this forum is part of the core CMS software, so it works more like an article and commenting system as used in the rest of the site. The previous CMS didn't have any options for a forum, we were using a 3rd party plug in.

    There is the possibility that we find good 3rd party forum plug in to use with this CMS as well. If nothing else we may be able to make it appear more like a traditional format forum.

    The lack of being able to automaticly quote the message you are replying to is the biggest drawback.

    The announcement of Outpost Gallifrey closing at the end of July was a coincidence that it was timed while we opened up our new site here.

    We are trying to iron whatever bumps we can which can be ironed out.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • (SPOILER) Possible Weddings in "Doctor Who"?   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Are we going to stick with the idea of adding the word 'Spoiler' in thread titles where the 'possible news' could be seen as a spoiler?

    Cheers, daveac

  • (SPOILER) Possible Weddings in "Doctor Who"?   5 years 24 weeks ago

    I think we've heard/read that Rose was called 'Rose Smith' on some spoilers, indicating that her and the Human/Timelord hybrid that is David Tennant on Pete's World will get married, but the other weddings sound like rubbish to me!

    I don't care about the Martha one so much as I do the Sarah Jane one! She hasn't even shown a liking to anyone up until now, that's a bit quick isn't it?

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Let me see if I understand this. We've traded a forum where italics and bolding were simple, one-letter commands to one where you've got to use a word one letter longer than the word "bold" itself — strong — just to get dark text? And there's no ability to have colored text, at all? I'm not seeing that as an allowed tag. Let me try, by giving this next sentence the standard HTML command to turn white: How will we hide spoilers? Nope, that didn't work at all.

    But perhaps most objectionable is the complete lack of quoting facility. Seriously, how can you have a discussion when you can't easily quote people? I mean, I can imagine we might jury-rig some usage of the definition-list commands — dl and dt — but that's an awful lot of manual work to get to something that only approximates quoting. It won't be nearly so easy to read or follow as what we had before.

    In short, this isn't really forum software but commenting software. Not really seeing the wisdom in this, Louis, especially given the fact we're losing the Outpost as well. That basically leaves DWO as the only major, genuine Doctor Who forum left. Was that really your intention?

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Just changed to 'Flat Settings' and much prefer it - mainly for the fact that the replies don't keep getting narrower!

    Cheers, daveac

  • (SPOILER) Possible Weddings in "Doctor Who"?   5 years 24 weeks ago

    The Sun first came out with it, we tweeted about it at the time. Digital Spy picked up on afterwards. The source is still The Sun, which means it could be all rubbish or there could be some grains of truth in there.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Gallifreyan Embassy Website Regenerated   5 years 24 weeks ago

    And just like a new Doctor, things may be a little awry at first, until we settle in. Sort of like new teeth.

    Cheers,
    Louis

  • Gallifreyan Embassy Website Regenerated   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Just like a new Doctor takes time to used to, it's gonna take me some time to get used to this - but I will!

  • Thank You Louis!   5 years 24 weeks ago

    I think everything looks great! I really appreciate all the time and effort put into the revamp of the site!

    Congrats!

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Have to agree with Capricorn1's comments. I have a nice 20" widescreen monitor which was nicely filled by the 'classic' site. Now the area which previously housed the left and right side bars (containing quick links, adverts, information etc.) are blank (well tiled seals of Rassilon). Consequently, the space which used to be reserved for the main content has been divided up into three (the now narrow main content plus both the sidebars). Sorry to whine, my Mum used to say 'if you haven't any thing nice to say then don't say anything' but I never listened to her!

  • Threaded or Flat   5 years 24 weeks ago

    I'm not really liking the look of the new forum at all at the moment. The new site in general is very good but the forum doesn't current;y feel very 'forum-y' if that makes sense? It feels more like a list of comments and is far too narrow. I hope Louis is able to make it wider and that it grows on me.

  • Thank You Louis!   5 years 24 weeks ago

    It does indeed look rather nice.

    Very web2.0 - or should that be 3.0.

  • Wow! Outpost Gallifrey and the Doctor Who Forum are closing!   5 years 24 weeks ago

    Every cloud has a silver lining, it's got me to get off my lazy, nowhere near toned enough bottom and finally get round to registering here after listening for the last few years.

    Admittedly as silver linings go it has more of a tin hue than you'd hope but hey, it's something.

New Doctor Who Podshock schwag

Podcast Feeds

Subscribe to
the Doctor Who podcast
Doctor Who: Podshock


iTunes users click here
Podcast
Gallifreyan Embassy - Doctor Who: Podshock - Doctor Who: Podshock


Direct podcast feeds:


Doctor Who: Podshock
Podcast


MP3 Format Podcast:
Doctor Who: Podshock MP3
Podcast


  More feeds and info

  Supporting Subscribers

DW Podshock App

iPhone, iPad, iPod touch podcast companion app

Doctor Who: Podshock Podcast Companion App

Doctor Who: Podshock Companion App

Syndicate (RSS Feed)

Syndicate content

Poll

How do you rate Doctor Who: Death in Heaven? (5=Fantastic)
5 TARDIS Groans
33%
4 TARDIS Groans
17%
3 TARDIS Groans
0%
2 TARDIS Groans
0%
1 TARDIS Groan
17%
0 TARDIS Groans
33%
Total votes: 6

Amazon US Store

Amazon UK Store

Latest image

DW Podshock 318 Cover

BBC Shop (UK & Europe)