![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[site community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/comm_staff.png)
Don't show backdated entries on Latest Things
Title:
Don't show backdated entries on Latest Things
Area:
entries, latest things
Summary:
Don't show backdated entries in Latest Things.
Description:
So far as I can tell, posting an entry backdated means it doesn't show up on reading lists, but it does still show up on latest things, arranged by when posted, not by the date and time set in the backdating. This doesn't seem consistent to me.
I have no idea of the technical reasons or difficulties, I admit!
This suggestion:
Should be implemented as-is.
46 (79.3%)
Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)
Shouldn't be implemented.
1 (1.7%)
(I have no opinion)
11 (19.0%)
(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)
no subject
I only wonder if people assume backdating alone should keep a post off the latest things page, and that alone shouldn't, I think. (What if the backdating is only a few hours back, or what if it's to yesterday's date but it's just past midnight when it's posted...)
no subject
no subject
no subject
Those posts are of little to no relevence and I'd not want to see such things lon latest, if someone backdates they do so for some sort of reason, not wanting it on Reading pages, normally becausre it's a clutter post, is valid. I'd just assumed latest things wouldn't pick up something I backdated to 1999, and I suspect those that use the feature had done likewise.
no subject
I used to use it it under just two circumstances on LJ; 1) when I was manually restoring a deleted journal, or 2) when I was manually restoring a deleted post (oh, and I used to use it for Sticky Posts, too, but I don't use Stickys anymore, so that's no longer an excuse to break out the backdating).
I don't like to delete comments, so when comments would get too out-of-control (admittedly I'm too hot-headed to be a good ringmaster under those circumstances), I was more comfortable just deleting the post they were attached to, then restoring the post after whatever brouhaha occurred finally calmed down. Comments? Automatically gone, forever.
Otherwise, backdating is not a "feature" I touch. If I don't want a post on the Latest Things page, I know I can just make it private, access-list, or subscriber-list only, then change the security just five minutes later and it will never display on Latest Things. Which is a good thing to know. :)
I also know that if I'm really worried about not wanting a post to show up on the Latest Things page, all I have to do is lock the post down to one of the security levels mentioned in the last paragraph.
Given that, I don't see why people expect backdating to eliminate Latest Things display of their posts when backdating was not designed to stop that - it was designed to backdate things, period.
no subject
The reading page uses the server time when the entry hit the server to determine the position that the entry shows up there, given that time zones and people with computers with badly-set dates exist. One fellow I know on LJ has been two years in the future for ages, either because he and his band play time travelers on stage, or because at some point in his past there was a date incident. People in a community can post to it with any date (because the backdate feature is turned off in communities, due to time zones, people with badly-set dates, and the moderation queue) and so comms use posting order in the lastn view, and user-specified date in the calendar view. Latest Things strikes me as sort of inherently lastn, so it should continue to use actual posting order.
no subject
top post - Nov. 25th at whatever:am
next post - Nov. 25th at whatever:pm
next post- Nov. 26th at whatever:am
next post - Nov. 26th at whatever:am
next post - Nov. 26th at whatever:am
next post - Nov. 25th at whatever:am
next post - Nov. 25th at whatever:pm (ditto next three posts, all dated Nov. 25th)
I was sitting here rubbing my eyes trying to figure out if I was seeing things, but I guess I wasn't. I can't recall if the out-of-order (Nov. 26th) posts were from comms or not, but either way, your explanation clears up a lot of my initial confusion over that. :)
no subject
no subject
no subject