91Èȱ¬ iD on 606 and h2g2
Post categories: 91Èȱ¬ iD
| 15:12 UK time, Thursday, 11 February 2010
On Tuesday we moved two of our biggest communities 606 and h2g2 to the new sign in system 91Èȱ¬ iD.
With blogs, message boards and these two communities successfully transferred there are only a small number of sites left to go.
Thanks to you all for your patience throughout this process. The 91Èȱ¬ iD help pages are here.
And if you are of a technical bent you may be interested in this recent blog post from Web Developer about the used in the 91Èȱ¬ iD status bar.
I think it's gone well and is going well. But as always I'd welcome your comments.
Nick Reynolds is Social Media Executive, 91Èȱ¬ Online
Comment number 1.
At 11th Feb 2010, Jeremy Harris wrote:First up, I'm not panicked about the switch for h2g2. It worked, and it worked well for me.
What is a shame is that the h2g2 nickname thing couldn't be ironed out in advance of the rollout - the silly names, often carrying information about content or activities of interest to a Researcher, are a key part of the character of the community. I hope they won't be gone long.
On a more minor but still irritating note, it's tedious that punctuation, including ?, is not permitted in nicknames. This, for me at least, means a change to my on-screen identity after over 8 years on the site. I'm not upset about it, but it's a bit of a disappointment!
That said, if we get the long names back, or the previously mentioned solution to this, then that's great.
Whoami?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 11th Feb 2010, TV Licence fee payer against 91Èȱ¬ censorship wrote:#1. At 4:51pm on 11 Feb 2010, Whoami - iD dislikes punctuation wrote:
"What is a shame is that the h2g2 nickname thing couldn't be ironed out in advance of the rollout - the silly names, often carrying information about content or activities of interest to a Researcher, are a key part of the character of the community."
Why not just use a 'signature' strap-line, in fact that might be a useful addition to 91Èȱ¬ iD anyway, either set to be added automatically on every comment or added via a button at the time of posting.
The problem with long user names outside of the h2g2 area is others, not having been party to the goings on within h2g2, is to know what part of the user name is most relevant (for citation purposes etc.), for example had you not placed your 'signature' at the bottom of your comment how would others know what is information about you or your interests and what is the more important ID part, are you "Whoami", "iD dislikes punctuation" or "Whoami - iD dislikes punctuation" if you see what I mean...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 11th Feb 2010, Jeremy Harris wrote:Hello Boilerplated,
It's all to do with a decade of h2g2 history, that even predates its acquisition by the 91Èȱ¬, back before the other sites that use the DNA platform had been thought of. As it happens, my understanding is that a way of providing that distinction and still offering the 'long names with stuff in them' functionality is being cooked up.
I'm not actually that critical of iD, as I hope came across in my post. I remember the last move between sign-in systems, and this one does seem to be going a lot more smoothly. It's just the usual thing that things aren't necessarily happening in the best order. Obviously, I'm not demanding that they do, just noting it. There's lots exciting happening h2g2-wise at the moment, what with the impending redesign, and all that goes with it. I'm pretty sure it'll all come together.
The key difference is that h2g2 has a productive side. The reason that these things are put into people's nicknames is that then it appears wherever their name is shown - not necessarily a blog posting. It also updates, so it's not tied to the age of the post.
But as I say, I understand that this is being addressed, so I thought it was worthy of note but it's not really a complaint!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 11th Feb 2010, TV Licence fee payer against 91Èȱ¬ censorship wrote:3. At 8:51pm on 11 Feb 2010, Whoami - iD dislikes punctuation wrote:
"The key difference is that h2g2 has a productive side. The reason that these things are put into people's nicknames is that then it appears wherever their name is shown - not necessarily a blog posting. It also updates, so it's not tied to the age of the post."
Yes, I can understand all that but if the 91Èȱ¬ offered a 'signature strap-line' (user profile) function it could work in much the same way, as it would actually be nothing more than a small server side include file, so if someone updates their profile in this respect, every single post they have ever made with the strap-line option included will be loaded into a web browser with the most up to date version if you see what I mean. It wouldn't be that difficult for the 91Èȱ¬ to even offer different 'profiles' for different user selected areas.
The only problem I can see is that of policing it, like anything it could get abused, creation/changes of a profile (with perhaps only one change being allowed pre month say) might need to be pre-modded before being set free...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 12th Feb 2010, Damnyoureyes wrote:There is some more info about a site specific nickname coming shortly which is mentioned on the announcements thread over on h2g2
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 14th Feb 2010, Franky wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 27th Mar 2010, U14390976 wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 12th May 2010, U14460911 wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 20th May 2010, talat wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 21st Jul 2010, ozgurdunyam wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)