It happened to me, too. :(

Why is it that they think this more accurate version of leaving all unread threads bold an improvement? I thought that finding ways for the viewer to have to work less, not more, to make their visit here enjoyable would be the definition of improvement.

I find it annoying that I now have to either go to the main page and mark everything as read each time I come here, or have to pay attention to the time stamp of the last post as I scroll down the forum now.

You should ask one of the moderators who supposedly took part in a focus group with IB on this issue. Maybe they can tell you.

Not the mods, just that one guy, I think it's sbm12 who called posters here liars and intimated he/she was involved with testing of some sort. According to Randy, mods were told at roll-out, not before and were not involved in any testing.

I am not trying to suggest you are wrong; I am simply trying to understand what your usage is. If anyone other than you has posted in the thread you'll see it on the list. If there is a thread where new content is generated by edits to existing posts rather than adding new posts to the thread I can see how there might be problems. But I also don't really understand why folks would use the system that way. When the system is used in a manner which it is not designed for strange things happen. Just MHO.
Was I informed prior to it going live? Yes. Did I have feedback? Yes. Did it play out exactly as I predicted? Yes.

But I also have now used the new system for a few days and am quite happy with the change. Threads are marked as read when I read them on my laptop. They are marked read when I read them on my BB. They are marked read when I read them on my desktop. They are marked as read when I read them on a kiosk, from an internet cafe, in an airport lounge or at a client site. Most significantly, all of these systems are in sync. In the end this saves me a TON of time figuring out what I have or have not read yet if I switch between one of the access methods which I do quite frequently.

I'll try to remember that next time someone suggests that any member - moderator, TB or other - actually has a vote on how the site is operated. :rolleyes:

No. I said that there was discussion and notification of some members before it went live. I never said there was testing by FT members or and of the other bits you're trying to put in my mouth (on my keyboard??). So, yes, people claiming that no one knew before this happened are making a false claim. Whether they are doing so out of ignorance or because they simply do not want to believe that such happened is something I don't know, but I am more than happy to continue to share the facts behind what happened.

And, at the risk of getting in trouble for sharing more of the discussion that occurred in the thread that myself and other moderators participated in, Randy's post in the other thread was an incomplete version of history. Yes, one moderator expressed the concerns that Randy shared. Others were very much in favor of making the change and still others were reporting back bugs and community feedback as the change happened and members started to notice.

dhammer53 notes up thread that just because a few people like it doesn't make it right. The same goes the other direction. Just because a few people hate it doesn't make it wrong. More people are always going to complain about something they don't like than are going to champion a change that they do like. That's just the way of the world. The fact that there are really only a handful of people complaining about this change while the rest of FT has moved on and adapted to the change says something, IMO.

Now we're ignorant ... joy :rolleyes:

If you understand anything about statistical analysis, the paragraph I quoted proves absolutely nothing. The adaptees probably don't care one way or the other so they are a different sample.

It is nice that you consider those who don't care to be your target market.

What was your feedback? Did IB listen?

Uh, don't you think this is a bit harsh? I read the admins posts as well as Randy's can came to the conclusion this was a business decision made by IB.

Why wouldn't it generate more hits? If I am subscribed to a thread that I don't necessarily read every time someone posts to it I have to click on it to make it disappear from MyFlyertalk. Multiply that by all the members and hits will go up.

If you were consulted, was it to test or to give your opinion? My money says to test :D

All that said, I still like the change, though I did not like the fact that yesterday when I marked a forum read, it marked them ALL read. But it did get rid of stuff in MyFT :D

I'd like to see that fixed.

And there's the group that just think FT is acting flaky again and don't know a change has been made.

Great for you. Maybe in the next revision, we can have a check box in our settings to say whether we prefer the new way or the old way. I admit I haven't read the tech issues board over the years. Has there been a groundswell of people saying they couldn't keep track of where they were from one device to the next?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/13612815-post209.html

and

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/13614009-post210.html

Back to back posts hours apart that you know make me search for the thread. Absolutely horrible marketing maneuver from this end user viewpoint. :td:

WHO REQUESTED THIS CHANGE?

Saying that it is more accurate is inaccurate. The bolding is telling me something that I don't want to know, and the way that it was done previously told me what I wanted to know.

The "new system" makes it seem that Flyertalk is broken. Since It took me a while to search through "Technical Issues" and find this thread, it has been a frustrating two weeks.

sbm, If you were to count the likes vs dislikes, I think you'd see a serious majority disliking the change; vs a serious minority liking the change.

dhammer53

I hate this new feature. Can we have a poll please!