The "it" factor

[Matt]

As some of you have seen, the site is attempting to link the word "it" where ever it appears (this includes it being a part of a word like "with") on the site.

This has to do with the new Tower Connections thing we are doing and the fact that one of Stephen Kings books is called "IT". As we all know and love :rock:

The fix is a piece of code that tells the autolink system to ignore any article title under 3 characters. :idea:

I'm going to turn it on now to see if it works, this thread is here to report sightings of the IT

[Matt]

Looks good so far, it linked the connections page but not any instance of it. :rock:

[Matt]

and now it has been removed from any thread it appeared in before.

Please let me know if you see it linked anywhwere :D

[Letti]

I miss IT... :lol:

[Daghain]

Wonder if there's a way you can code it to only recognize IT, and not every combination of "it". That way you get the best of both worlds. :lol:

[fernandito]

What Dag said.

[Jon]

Thats IT...I quit!


LOL

[Randall Flagg]

It should not recognize tit

[Letti]

Wonder if there's a way you can code it to only recognize IT, and not every combination of "it". That way you get the best of both worlds. :lol:

Maybe we could code IT just in one case - if it's written by big letters, huh?
I mean "it" wouldn't be marked, nor would "It" but "IT".

:orely:

[Patrick]

That's IT! Letti has HIT on the solution!

[Matt]

:lol:

that is not as easy as it sounds you guys, I was lucky to come up with this.

It may just be the phantom book :ninja:

[Daghain]

:lol:

[Jean]

the book isn't called "IT". It is called "It".

Sorry to be a bore, but. Is it necessary to link everything, or could there be an option to switch it off? I mean, in discussion people rather often need some means of expression, and they don't have too many - for example, italics has to be used very cautiously since, as I've already complained, this means of expression is obliterated when the post is quoted - thus, as a poster, who hopes to take part in rather sophisticated discussions, I personally wouldn't like any graphics that were not meant by me for emphasis to appear in my posts. It is all very good for all those magnificent features you guys are adding and I can't but admire, but it is bad for discussion, and the discussion is the backbone of the site.

Can the link be at least as inconspicuous as possible? Maybe a very pale line? Or maybe the information (somewhere at Way Station) that some words (and, remember, there's going to be more and more and MORE of them, so finally every word of a post will be linked) are linked, and the link will only be revealed when you hover your mouse over it?

[Matt]

I'm sorry Jean but the thing is designed to work the way it is working now. The links pretty much disappear to me and its an all or nothing thing. Either I leave them as is or turn them off.

Personally, I think its cool as hell and I don't use my mouse at all to read posts so in the end, its just a little blue line.

The net is so extensively linked, I am just used to it.

I think they are the opposite of "bad for discussion"

[Jean]

I had expected that I would be in minority, or rather the only one expressing this opinion, so it's ok: I still think that it reduces a poster's means of expression in discussion posts, placing unexpected emphasis where it wasn't supposed to be http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/mishemplushem/Facilitation/bear_sad.gif, but I understand that there are other considerations, too.

[Daghain]

You're not alone, Jean. I didn't like the "visual clutter" at first, but I'm getting used to it now. :)

[Letti]

You're not alone, Jean. I didn't like the "visual clutter" at first, but I'm getting used to it now. :)

For my part I didn't know that it exsits. But you made me realise it does. :)

[Daghain]

:lol: The colors help. It's fairly light - if they were red or something it would be really annoying. :D