Hey there! For complicated reasons, some of which I will explain later, I'm in the middle of dong a pretty gigantic revamp to the Motte codebase. Right now, this means "fix a bunch of small bugs". Later, other things will be happening.
The immediate goal of this is not to massively transform the site or do a Digg v4/New Reddit thing. Frankly, if the site remained exactly the same (but with fewer bugs) I would be happy.
The long-term goal isn't going to be quite that static, though. The long-term goal is to set things up to allow more subcommunities, similar to how subreddits work. This will be a larger set of changes. These changes will not obsolete The Motte itself; I am absolutely aiming for a site that can comfortably keep holding The Motte. I've talked about this before if you want to go read about it - this is still the same plan, for what it's worth, it's just now being (slowly) executed.
I will be posting more, and asking questions about next steps, when actual site behavioral changes are in the queue. This just isn't that! This is infrastructure work.
tl;dr: The site backend may be a little wonky for a bit, sorry about that, please report any bugs.
(and mods, feel free to unsticky this in a few days if I forget)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
...wasn't that always intentionally hidden?
Who said it was intentionally hidden, but the "context" link worked, and the context is frequently relevant.
I will note that hiding the "context" link doesn't actually prevent people from figuring out whose it is, as it's possible to Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V the post into the search bar in another tab.
Weird. Context link has always been visible and functional for me.
Yes, the "context" link used to work. I thought I said that, but maybe I wasn't clear.
RR is saying that it doesn't anymore, and I can confirm (I got served immediately after making that post, and indeed used the workaround I stated).
Should be fixed now (ping @RandomRanger).
Part of the changes involved solving a huge number of weird undocumented inconsistencies, and some of these either got solved the wrong way or were inconsistent-by-design. It is kind of weird that you can see the context; we're leaving that in for now just because the alternatives are worse.
(What it really should be doing is giving you an anonymized view of the conversation tree but I do not want to think about coding that at the moment. Maybe later.)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link