Yes. See my post where I pointed out my experience too in an attempt to help. Perhaps if you updated it regularly instead of responding to posts then people might be aware that you are doing something - so, no, I cannot see that you are actively doing something.

Paul, may I make a suggestion? A daily formal update with, perhaps, a little basic info about what has been done, would counter the perception that IBB is content to just let the situation lie.

Thanks!

So for virtually every thread started in the past few days the "new posts" button takes me to start of thread. Older threads take me to some post in the thread (like this one, Post #37).

(begin speculation)I wonder if some counter max-ed out somewhere, or the board hit some kind of overflow. I note that we're now over 16 million posts.... could there be a register overflow around 16 million that causes later posts to not record as last read? (speculation off)

Sure hope something is found soon as reading FT has become a real chore.

;)

Seriously, I did check to make sure that we are not quite there yet. We're currently still with fewer than 16.7M posts.

Nobody is content with this problem -- thus, our presence in this thread every day.

There really isn't a useful "regular" status update to make; when Dick or I post that we have tried something and ask members to watch for changes in the behavior of the site, that's when we have made a functional change. Otherwise it's a lot of poking around, running queries, and the like, trying to come up with a plan of action that we immediately post here.

I assure you, this is receiving priority attention and will be resolved as soon as possible. Yes, it is a frustrating one. We certainly get it. With your help, we'll resolve it soon. But posting, "Hey guys, we ran another day's worth of queries through the database," is not going to help -- if anything, it would take time away from helping. We're reading every post that's made here and it's been really helpful. Your patience is appreciated!

Paul

I remember that change (though we cannot call the pages static just because they use .html).

Viewing the details of the traffic we can see things like:

Code:

---

11:19:41.640 Status: pending GET http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/southwest-rapid-rewards/1230034-chase-rapid-reward-points-did-anyone-not-get-theirs-transferred-new-post.html

11:19:41.696 Status: 301[Moved Permanently] GET http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=16635962#post16635962

11:19:42.890 Status: 200[OK] GET http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/southwest-rapid-rewards/1230034-chase-rapid-reward-points-did-anyone-not-get-theirs-transferred.html#post16635962

---

The URI points to the same (incorrect in this case) place in the thread both pre- and post- vbSEO, so we can rule that out.

And now that I've logged on from home, using Safari 5.0.5 under Mac OS X 10.6.8, it is working perfectly -- I've been correctly taken to the first new post in every thread I've read.

Been working perfectly for me for several weeks in Chrome. Accidentally opened FT in FF5 last night and had deja vu while reading a thread. Yup, it had taken me back to June 6. (In the very-active Penalty Box, nonetheless!)

I am continuing to have problems with various browsers and various OSes.

It's getting very frustrating.

I think we have worked out what platform it was tested on then ! Consider yourself lucky.

It seems to be working for me thus far in Safari 5.0.5 on my Apple Macintosh computer, but the frustrating problem still exists in Firefox 5.0.

I will have to continue using FlyerTalk in Safari to see if it is working as intended...

vB does, but it's in the forum of a parameter in the query string. The format is showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=1234567 where t is the thread ID.

I'm primairly testing on FF5 on a Mac, as that is the most common browser reporting the problem, but I can't replicate it with my own viewed threads.

There is a strong correlation between usage of "new" browsers (both IE9 and FF5) and this issue.

As they say on Mythbusters, "Well, THERE's your problem!"

FF5 on a Mac is not the same as FF5 on a PC. I'd hazard a guess that the overwhelming majority of us experiencing this problem use PCs, and not Macs. Perhaps if you tested with the software AND OS, you might have a more reliable indicator of the issue?

My Firefox 5.0 issue is indeed on an Apple Macintosh computer.

I have not tried Firefox on Windows 7 or Windows XP yet, although those browsers were not upgraded...