"Slip, if you click on the convo in your notification panel, it will take you directly to the comment. Craig "
Not always Craig...often I get directed to either the body of the topic and/or the top of the page! On Apr 1, 7:25 pm, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > Thunderbird manages things hierarchically (and spell-check helped with > that word), as threaded discussions. Replies appear as sub-messages > similar to the g-group list frame, but the PITA is that the collapsed > threads retain the OP date (unlike the g-group thread summary page), so > older conversations get difficult to track. > > On 4/1/2010 4:40 AM, Slip Disc wrote: > > > > > Gravity is definitely distinct in that way. In here if there is a > > thread with 178 comments and I reply to comment #25 no one really > > knows what it is about because it is at the end. (does that make > > sense?) So in that way Gravity is better. > > > On Mar 31, 11:17 am, Chris Jenkins<[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Yeah, the three dimensional nature of the post structure is one of my > >> favorite things about Gravity. You can't do that on the Google group. > > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Kierkecraig<[email protected] > > >>> wrote: > >>> What I like about Gravity is that you can reply to a comment made on a > >>> topic thread and it threads itself below. In google groups if you > >>> reply to a comment it just puts it at the bottom with the rest of the > >>> comments. I wish Gravity allowed for even more threading. I don't > >>> know, maybe google groups does it too and I just haven't figured it > >>> out over all these years. > > >>> On Mar 30, 6:07 am, Chris Jenkins<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> No fears, Rigs. This list will never be shut down, unless Google > >>>> discontinues the service, which doesn't seem likely. ;) I can't post to > >>>> Gravity easily on my phone, and reading the posts here while on a smoke > >>>> break is one of my simple pleasures. :) > > >>>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:38 PM, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> Thank you for the invitation and I'll see about it later as I am > >>>>> swamped plus my computer needs a fresh start so I may wait. I have > >>>>> enjoyed the topics and comments here and hope this forum doesn't close > >>>>> down. I will probably change my name as there is a rigsby and all > >>>>> sorts of interlopers-lol!// On the bright side, the weather has been > >>>>> great and life and family in fine shape and changes plus strawberries > >>>>> are in and Easter desserts are my latest obsession. Last Friday I made > >>>>> my first apple strudel from scratch and it was beginner's luck! > >>>>> Imagine that! Plus nothing relaxes like filing your taxes! :-) Cheers > >>>>> to all... > > >>>>> On Mar 26, 11:11 am, Chris Jenkins<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>> Yeah, I'm digging it, and we're finding new blood in there as well. > > >>> Glad > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>> know you're still alive! ;D > > >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Kierkecraig< > > >>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> Chris, > >>>>>>> I see, Gabby emailed me and I interpreted from what she said as the > >>>>>>> group was moving. I've joined the Gravity group now. I can see > > >>> why > > >>>>>>> you started a group there, it seems to be quite user friendly. > >>>>>>> Craig > > >>>>>>> On Mar 26, 6:11 am, Chris Jenkins<[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> I don't know...what's this about it "moving"? :) > > >>>>>>>> There's no moving. I think many of the traditionalists, myself > > >>>>> included, > > >>>>>>>> will always like the convenience of an email list. I just formed > > >>> a ME > > >>>>>>> group > > >>>>>>>> on Gravity so that we had a place for more three dimensional, > > >>> rich > > >>>>> media > > >>>>>>>> friendly conversations. It seems to be working out pretty well. > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Kierkecraig< > > >>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> So what's this about ME moving to "Gravity"? What in the world > > >>> is > > >>>>>>>>> "Gravity"? > >>>>>>>>> Kierkecraig > > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 11:17 am, Chris Jenkins<[email protected] > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> What is the 6.5 measuring? Is that a 10 scale as a website? > > >>> As a > > >>>>>>>>>> conversational tool? > > >>>>>>>>>> Here are my thoughts: > > >>>>>>>>>> 1. The conversations there are much more rich media friendly. > > >>> I > > >>>>> can > > >>>>>>> embed > > >>>>>>>>>> images, links, videos, etc, right into the page, making it > > >>> more > > >>>>>>> likely to > > >>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>> seen. > > >>>>>>>>>> 2. The conversations are three dimensional - a "Reply" can be > > >>>>> fully > > >>>>>>>>> fleshed > > >>>>>>>>>> out as a separate thread using the comments below it, while > > >>> not > > >>>>>>>>> interrupting > > >>>>>>>>>> the stream of the original topic. > > >>>>>>>>>> 3. The influx of people being driven by Gravity's marketing > > >>>>> efforts > > >>>>>>> means > > >>>>>>>>>> that our conversations get to a wider audience. > > >>>>>>>>>> As I've previously stated, I don't think Gravity will ever be > > >>> a > > >>>>>>>>> replacement > > >>>>>>>>>> for the ME list, short of Google shutting down the service. I > > >>>>> think > > >>>>>>> it's > > >>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>> fantastic augmentation, however. > > >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Slip Disc< > > >>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> Ulysses here, wondering what any of you think about the new > >>>>>>>>>>> Gravity.com arena. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Here are some of my thoughts. A plus is the ability to > > >>> explore > > >>>>>>> other > > >>>>>>>>>>> conversations while partaking in a few of your own. In > > >>>>> comparison > > >>>>>>>>>>> with ME there are thousands more participants so one can > > >>> move > > >>>>> out > > >>>>>>> of a > > >>>>>>>>>>> room into another without have to log into a new place and > > >>>>> change > > >>>>>>>>>>> parties. However, I found that most replies don't get > > >>> answers > > >>>>>>> right > > >>>>>>>>>>> away and some don't get any. One can easily get too spread > > >>> out > > >>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>> there and forget where they were. I'd rather just be able > > >>> to > > >>>>> Tag > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> conversations I took part in. It seems I could spend 20 > > >>>>> minutes > > >>>>>>> just > > >>>>>>>>>>> retracing my steps. > > >>>>>>>>>>> The Orbiting feature I find cumbersome, in that after > > >>> logging > > >>>>> on > > >>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>> are too many little tidbits of what everyone had to say and > > >>> do, > > >>>>>>> just > > >>>>>>>>>>> too much needless information. I don't feel I need to be > > >>>>> informed > > >>>>>>>>>>> that someone simply liked a reply. In fact I had to stop > > >>>>> orbiting > > >>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>> couple of people because they post so much that I had to > > >>> scroll > > >>>>>>> down > > >>>>>>>>>>> near 30 bits to get to the next. So that part of getting > > >>> back > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> conversations is time consuming. A big minus for me there > > >>> is > > >>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>> even knowing that someone replied to a reply does not > > >>>>> necessarily > > >>>>>>> mean > > >>>>>>>>>>> that you will find it at the end of the conversation > > >>> because > > >>>>> they > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>> reply midway any time. That means that I have to scan the > > >>>>> entire > > >>>>>>>>>>> conversation to find the reply, which could take some time > > >>> if > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
