Problem in Beer Photography thread

The New Posts page says the last post, by corythosaurus, appeared 5 hours ago. Title of thread is b.f. at New Posts, meaning I haven't seen all that's in it. When I try to catch up, I land at Post 766 (top of p. 52), and the page ends with Post 780 from yesterday. This happens whether I start from the thread title in New Posts, from "go to unread" in New Posts, from the link in the Last Post column in New Posts, or from the link for latest post on corytho's home page.

I've got the same problem and have observed this in other threads in the past.
Does this happen if a new post in a followed thread is deleted before it was read?

Michael456 wrote in post #19456003
Does this happen if a new post in a followed thread is deleted before it was read?

P.S.: I don't follow the thread (or any threads), I just keep up with the whole Food forum. In case that helps with diagnosis.

I think it's fixed now. Today's addition to the thread shows up for me.

Right after POST 19452375 was posted, post https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=19452382 was posted and deleted by him.

Often these "what happened?" happen between when you see the link and click it: someone deletes a post so what you see is "stale data".

One request if you do not mind: when reporting, give direct links to threads and posts in question. "Post #760 in beer thread" just means more work for mods.

Besides, those #- numbers are not to be considered as fixed post indentification numbers (as post ids are), they can change when posts between are deleted. If I were to decide, I would remove the from view, but they are part of historical heritage of old forum software so some may feel comfy to see them.

PS. Following a thread handles deleted posts accurately and in few seconds your notification list is updated. Notifications also direct you to deleted post message as above (post id links do that). That way you won't get stale data and you will be informed about deleted post when you arrive to it.

Pekka wrote in post #19457231
.
Besides, those #- numbers are not to be considered as fixed post indentification numbers (as post ids are), they can change when posts between are deleted. If I were to decide, I would remove the from view, but they are part of historical heritage of old forum software so some may feel comfy to see them.
.

.
Thank you for keeping the posts numbered in consecutive order. . These numbers are important to me for some of the ways I use POTN. . For instance, if I want to keep the "notifications" for a certain thread at a given number, it helps me to figure out how to keep it at "700 new posts" or whatever number I am shooting to keep it at.

Also, I am am making a new post, and want to make sure it goes at the top of a new page, or make sure that it does NOT go to a new page, I can manipulate its position on the page by deleting old posts I have made to the thread ... this is easier to accomplish if I know what the post number is. . I can divide by 15 and know where any given post will fall within a page, without having to scroll up and down (which I hate doing).

There are other reasons why having chronically consecutive numbers for each post in a thread is useful, but I do not feel like explaining the other reasons because it would take many minutes of additional thinking and typing to provide such explanations. . Suffice it to say that these numbers are useful to me and certainly make me feel comfy to see them


.