Comments on: Subscribe to the Play Index! http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210 This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6 By: DoubleDiamond http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-49353 Wed, 15 Sep 2010 12:17:37 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-49353 Mike Gaber, thanks for the explanation. Right after I posted my second comment, I did go to the "Found a bug or have a suggestion?" and reported the problem I had, even though I knew that the time I took to do this would make me a few minutes late for an appointment.

]]>
By: Mike Gaber http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-49244 Wed, 15 Sep 2010 00:35:19 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-49244 Also as an additional note:

The Spammer was able to register his "Screen Name" with BB-Ref as a Clickable Link:
Thus ("I guess"), they had to delete the whole post rather than just deleting the text like they do on other deletions where they just add a Note that the Post was Deleted.

]]>
By: Mike Gaber http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-49241 Wed, 15 Sep 2010 00:01:56 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-49241 @ 5 DoubleDiamond:

The post that @2 Jeff referred to was an "actual Spam".
Jeff's post was actually @3 but the Original @2 was Deleted moving the following posts up 1 number.

It has been deleted, but to prevent confusion, the Web Master should have left the Number @2 up and just mentioned it was deleted as Spam (etc.), rather than leaving you to believe your Post @1 was Spam.

As you can see your actual post is still up in it's rightful position @1.

]]>
By: DoubleDiamond http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-49220 Tue, 14 Sep 2010 22:42:13 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-49220 @2 - I am sorry to have posted what you consider to be "Spam". Most of us who post here do not have topic-starting privileges, so if we want to post something that is close to relevant but still off-topic, we need to find someplace to put in this comment where it won't stray too much from the intended subject matter. I did invite the Administrators to delete my comment if they considered it to be off-topic. I see that, since I posted mine (and you posted your response), Neil Paine has posted in response to something else in the comments for this entry. He has topic-starting privileges here, although I don't know if that gives him the capability to delete comments. If so, he chose to leave my comment alone.

I realize that I should have taken my issue to the "Found a bug or have a suggestion?" page here, and I will probably still do that. But one reason I posted it in the public forum where I put it is so that if others have also fallen victim to it, they can also see that they are not the only ones.

I will try to stay on topic and, if I have any more comments regarding the Administrative aspects of this blog, I'll take them to the "Found a bug or have a suggestion?" page. Again, I'm sorry that you chose to think of my comments here as Spam.

]]>
By: Neil Paine http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-48977 Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:39:47 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-48977 Re: #3 - No, it was an oversight on my part when it came to the template. The PI now covers all 90 years, including 1940-51.

]]>
By: Mike Gaber http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-48903 Tue, 14 Sep 2010 06:33:00 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-48903 I've been meaning to mention this a couple of times when I see the Subscribe to the Play Index Topic.

On Point 2: Search player game totals there is a (excluding 1940-1951)

it's repeated again on:

Point 3: Search player games looking for the most consecutive games matching a particular set of criteria
there is a (excluding 1940-1951)

I figure you would have fixed this by now.
Or does the exclusion still exist for these 2 points???

]]>
By: Jeff http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-48888 Tue, 14 Sep 2010 05:10:38 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-48888 Where's the "Mark for Spam" button when you need it?

]]>
By: DoubleDiamond http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8210/comment-page-1#comment-48818 Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:56:50 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8210#comment-48818 What follows is the beginning of a message I posted yesterday in the Jose DeLeon entry that has now gone to the 2nd page. It's in comment 24 of 24, probably posted just before the entry went to page 2 and thus off the radar of most people here. In case even the administrators missed it, I hope you don't mind if I repost this portion here, since it is an administrative matter, and this is an administrative entry. If it is not appropriate, please feel free to delete it. Thanks.

I want to say something off-topic - I hang out at an online forum on a completely different subject where people are required to register to be able to post. New messages are pre-populated with our registered email addresses, but we are allowed to blank them out (but not allowed to blank out our user names) before messages are posted. I appreciate that we are no longer required to register here, and I understand why we still need to supply a name and email address each time. This is made simpler by the fact that my name and email are "remembered" (probably due to cookies) each time, so they are still pre-populated for me.

But this is both good and bad news. Sometimes, before I start my message, I forget that I'm not on that other site, and I blank out the pre-populated email address here. Once I finish my message and hit the Post button, though, I go to an error page that tells me I didn't supply the required material. This would be an OK reminder, except that, when I hit the Back button to go put it in, MY MESSAGE IS GONE!

This has happened to me twice now, including after I posted a message in this topic [the Jose DeLeon entry] on the day the blog entry was made, September 9. Can something be done here to "save" already-composed messages so that if we forget to put in a required field, we can have the whole message back? Or is forgetting to enter one of these fields such a bad transgression that it is deemed to be a suitable punishment to make the person start the message all over again?

]]>