[META] Upgrade to 2.3

We upgraded to vanilla 2.3. Let me know if anything is broken/looks wonky.

Comments

  • edited April 2017
    Well done - I appreciate you keeping the tech up to date. I'm saying this as somebody with the habit of just leaving installations running for like a decade between updates. "It's not completely broken yet, I might as well let it be for now" :D

    Hey, this new version apparently enforces graphical emoticons. Now I'm starting to feel insecure in my luddite burrow. I suppose I'll need to be extra nice in the future, not having recourse to smileys anymore as a tonal crutch. Everybody, it's now on you to remember that I'm not being snide, angry or malicious when we discuss things.

    Or, I suppose I could start saying something like [joking]. That could work, but it has to be square brackets - '<' and '>' seem to get automatically edited out. (Using emoticons is apparently not an option for me for some reason - I suppose I'm too old to learn new tricks. Took me years to start accepting the need to have a smiley every other paragraph, too.)
  • edited April 2017
    On mobile, the default line spacing is a lot wider. I don't actually mind it being a bit wider than previously, but I personally feel like it's now a bit too wide--there's a substantial white space to text ratio, now.

    (Edit: on android, at least)
  • edited May 2017
    Blockquotes with unknown rel-targets look weird now
    Should be gray
  • I'm kinda iffy on the graphical emoticons. Not all graphical emoticons ever, but I'm not used to this set. :D <- this one which I use a lot (colon D) looks cruel which isn't what I want
  • edited May 2017
    (It just looks like someone laughing harmlessly to me! It may show up differently in different browsers.)
  • I guess we pareidolia a little differently. However, the image is the same in every browser; it's a tiny image file on S-G's server.
  • I see a cruel face as well, and I'm in the same boat with Sandra - I settled on a single smiley years ago (the "mouth wide open" one with ':' and 'D'), but apparently that one's a shorthand for "cruel mirth". I never knew :D

    Actually, try looking closer at that one. I think it's supposed to be "uncontrollable laughter" rather than "cruel mirth". Its eyes are like '><' which I think is supposed to mean that they're crunched closed. The angry interpretation comes about because it's easy to not notice the lower part, in which case you just see the angled eye-brows in an archetypal "angry face" position.
  • Yes, I see the "> <" as eye scrunched up, like when someone is laughing so hard their eyes are closed.

    It's simultaneously a really happy expression and a vulnerable one.
  • Paul_T said:

    Yes, I see the "> <" as eye scrunched up, like when someone is laughing so hard their eyes are closed.

    It's simultaneously a really happy expression and a vulnerable one.</p>

    It's really weird that everyone interprets this emoticon differently...I also see it as someone laughing really hard with their eyes scrunched up...but it doesn't look vulnerable or cruel to me at all...I really liked it because I thought it was a good response for when you think something is super funny, but now that I know people see negative emotions in it, I'm definitely not going to use it.

    James and Co., awesome job on the 2.3 update! Everything looks great! :smile: Thank you all for your hard work! :smile:

  • ("Vulnerable" might be too strong a word. I just think that people don't laugh that hard or let their eyes close unless they're feeling really comfortable, relaxed, and with company they know well and trust. When I think of the people I know who make that face in real life, it's under circumstances where they are either having a lot of fun, willing to feel embarassed in front of you, or both - really willing to be vulnerable, not someone with their guard up at all.)
  • Oh, okay, now I get it. That's how I see the emoticon too :smile:
  • edited May 2017
    For me the > < laughter reminds me of South Park. I don't get a vulnerable vibe. But everyone reads it differently.

    Typical humans, though, that I get so hung up about this issue instead of expressing gratitude to James and the S-G team for keeping this site open for over a decade. It's the only "Vanilla"-site I use but I'm often impressed by it, thank you.

    Btw, anyone have any idea about the blockquote thing?
  • @2097 I will poke at the css to fix the blockquote thing. I think it won't take long.
  • edited May 2017
    For me the > < laughter reminds me of South Park. I don't get a vulnerable vibe. But everyone reads it differently.

    Typical humans, though, that I get so hung up about this issue instead of expressing gratitude to James and the S-G team for keeping this site open for over a decade. It's the only "Vanilla"-site I use but I'm often impressed by it, thank you.

    Btw, anyone have any idea about the blockquote thing?
    Test
  • I think i fixed the CSS on quotes!
  • Looks good, James. I'm liking the upgrade.

  • How do you do write it? My test above hasn't turned gray yet
  • @2097: it's grey to me! My guess is that your css hasn't refreshed yet. Do a hard refresh on the page, or at worst, clear your cache. If it's still not, let me know.

    https://www.getfilecloud.com/blog/2015/03/tech-tip-how-to-do-hard-refresh-in-browsers/
Sign In or Register to comment.