It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


U2U Us When Someone Replies to Our Post?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 11:49 PM
You would only get replies if someone hit the reply to button, they could exempt this option for the person who started the thread, that way posters wouldn't get a large number of reply notices.

I think a good example for where this tool would be useful is the GFL Thread. Sorting through 256 pages to see if someone replied to me just seems a waste, people stop reading other's opinions and the thread goes to waste.

MODERATORS: Maybe you could activate this option when a thread reaches a certain number of posts, maybe 10-20 pages or something?

[edit on 19-10-2008 by PinealGlandThoth]

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 12:24 AM
You'd need to run a sanity check in order to ensure they actually post it, otherwise it won't know whether or not there was really a reply, and thus a fake u2u would be sent. It's still asking for a heavy deal, especially if people are going after one poster in particular, which does happen from time to time.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 12:02 PM
I had the same idea as the OP once I thought it was great, a u2u sent when somebody REPLIES to your particular POST.. tho I think some people havnt understood it. I also thought even that would be too hard on the servers because there is so much activity here and the u2u flood control thing is bad enough already.. so I never posted the idea. When threads go on for ages you personally have to scan each and every post to see if someone replied to your post.. which seems weird anyway hoping and looking... and thats also hoping they use the 'reply to' function as they should do anyway...... some dont, but thats their fault if you dont reply to them for not seeing it.

Anyway often it is a total waste of time and you may find nobody replied. And if they have and you dont look then you miss it. So you DO have to scan all posts... its a pain in the butt.

Someone mentioned Facebook, they do it right, ok so its not as heavy as ATS but they do have the best technology on there. I think there is probably TONS and TONS of junk on this site that 'could be' deleted to free up space and lessen the server strain... but thats a matter of choice.. some people think we need all the old junk left on here.. well I dont agree. Junk is junk and you all know what you would delete if you owned ATS.

Cant cator for everybody so why not just do what is important? I think timewasting should be dealt with. So many people would be scanning a thread looking for replies to their post and if they wasnt there scanning wouldnt that ease server strain? I dont know Im not a tech head dont shoot me.

Not everybody wants to read every post for 30 odd pages even if they are not posting, we just pick and choose and read / debate / chat with so and so. And checking the last name to post on a thread doesnt solve anything.

Surely there could be a compromise somewhere?

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 12:33 PM
The only benefit I see is for replies to a very old post/thread of yours.

The costs have already been mentioned by others in this thread...

Cost-Benefit analysis = Sorry Pineal, not worth it

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:02 PM
We used to have an 'email on reply" feature on here. SO removed for the same reason everyone is saying about the u2u one. Theres no way its gonna come back. Its not needed and ATS, im sure, tries to conserve as much bandwidth as possibile.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:15 PM
I'm absolutely on board for this one!

Getting U2U's for ONLY when someone has replied to your particular post in a thread!

You can even make it as an option it doesn't have to be implemented all across the board to all members, if you want the option you can have it,if you don't then don't.

This would help a lot specially in big fast moving threads.

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 09:07 PM
Does anyone know approximately how much bandwidth it would take to handle say an average of 50,000 replies everyday?

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 09:13 PM
reply to post by PinealGlandThoth

If each page is around 80 K's...we'll assume...not to mention avatars on the page and signatures on the page hosted on ATS, so lets say 100 to be safe.

That's 5,000,000 KB, or 5 GB in short. But that's also another (we'll say 5 K a message), so that's about 5 K a message, that's another 250 MB, so now we're at 5.25 GB.

It's not about bandwidth though dude, it's about server load, and the server can barely deal with what it's got on it now.

This post.php page takes 12 queries, on submit (depending) you're asking for it to add another query. That's a lot of pressure on a server, especially when there's so much data to send.

[Edited to fix multiplication]

[edit on 19.10.2008 by Shugo]

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in