Dec 03, 2014 05:20 | #1 While I agree that the actual post ID was unnecessary, I kind of liked the actual time stamp. One thing that always bugged me about the old forum's time stamps was the vagueness. "2 days ago" is worthless to me as a timestamp. What time of day? etc... Actual timestamps are useful. Not sure why you reverted it?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JMPhotos "Childhood ruined"  More info | Dec 03, 2014 06:45 | #2 I like the new post count to reflect the post # within the thread as opposed to overall post # forum wide. But I also agree that the "at 1:13pm on Dec 1, 2014" or however it was stamped, was useful. Canon 6D, & Sony α6000
LOG IN TO REPLY |
OhLook insufferably pedantic. I can live with that.  24,910 posts Gallery: 105 photos Best ofs: 2 Likes: 16339 Joined Dec 2012 Location: California: SF Bay Area More info | Dec 03, 2014 10:14 | #3 For older posts, absolute time is shown. Relative time (XXX ago) is shown for today's posts, and hovering on those timestamps produces absolute time. PRONOUN ADVISORY: OhLook is a she. | Comments welcome
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Dec 03, 2014 10:21 | #4 OhLook wrote in post #17308213  For older posts, absolute time is shown. Relative time (XXX ago) is shown for today's posts, and hovering on those timestamps produces absolute time. Awesome. Didn't realize that.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 1040 guests, 107 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
