Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Shortcut to Home Folder' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Shortcut to Home Folder
Authored by: everkleer80 on Jan 22, '11 11:01:10AM

You have a good point; Just yesturday, I found several useful hints (some as far back as '03) when I was searching to see if some I discovered recently were already posted. But this site is mainly an archive of hints. How do we decide how old a hint can be before duplicating it? Is it for each OS version? Probably most of the hints valid in one OS are valid in the next version, so we would end up with, for example, 500 hints for Tiger, then 400 of those would be duplicated for Leopard plus 500 new ones, then 800 of those would be duplicated for SL plus 500 more new ones... (These #s are purely made up, but I'm sure you see my point.) The site would really need to be redesigned to show old hints that are still valid - maybe have a button on old hints where users can confirm what OS versions they are valid in, and each OS version could have a separate archive for links to old but valid hints? I'm not really sure what the best way to do this would be, but I'd love to hear ideas since I am trying to design a similar site.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Shortcut to Home Folder
Authored by: philostein on Jan 22, '11 03:54:57PM

How about adding a 'Re-posted' tag to appropriate hints, and putting that check box in the Contents tab of the reader's account pane?

Other ideas: (this is all out-of-my-box thinking) have a quick response for a new hint, where readers could attach a link from an old one and cause the new hint to become a 'Re-posted' hint. That should allow crarko to quickly verify its veracity. Sensitive readers could even have an option that causes all hints to be 'Re-posted' for a period of time (say 3 days?) to give people with stronger stomachs a chance to bag and tag the hints correctly.



[ Reply to This | # ]