-
-
re: magic
linguafood
Dec 17, 2012 10:10 AM
Listen, I get what MGZ is saying. I also understand where you're coming from.
Believe you me, there are any number of threads in my profile I could do without, but they keep appearing whenever someone else posts something new, whether I am still interested in that thread or not.
You know what I do? I ignore that little "new" flag (or whatever's taken its place) and DON'T click on it anymore.
It really is that easy.
And I *do* ask myself before replying now whether this is absolutely necessary.
-
re: linguafood
I understand it's an easy thing to ignore. I think that is pretty obvious, and I would never argue that.
It's also an easy thing for CH to fix.
And if it's not an easy thing for CH to fix, then let us know!! We keep asking and asking about a fix but no one at CH has EVER addressed our repeated questions.
-
-
-
The Chowhound Team
Dec 17, 2012 09:57 AM
We don't generally delete replies on request. We'll make rare exceptions if someone made one post in perennially recurring thread and that post has no direct replies, but it's not something we want to do a lot of.
›3 Replies-
-
re: magic
The Chowhound Team
Dec 17, 2012 10:10 AM
Sorry, we don't have an answer for those questions, no. Mudaba and meshane have commented elsewhere that revisiting those functions is on the roadmap for next year, but we there's no precise details.
-
-
-
I for one would use a "delete" entire thread from my profile history option.It's likely 40% could go asap.
One of the reasons "locked threads" disappear from our profile history is to preserve "precious space" ,Jacquilynne in a response to ? and me two or three days ago.Where the architectural issue is I don't have enough information or the education to even guess.But if the "specific to profile" general archive space is ?crowded I would be more than willing to trim mine and send it to ?,All of it would still be in a searchable general archive rather than in the archive of every profile that replied.
I just looked at a 2008 page in my profile.I would maybe keep one.Almost none have any current pertinence,with two or three exceptions as duplications.If they haven't turned up since 2008 they only may be worthy of a general archive/library.
-
-
-
-
re: melpy
Sometimes, members tire of threads they might only have contributed once - 5 or 6 years ago. Yet these threads remain at the very top of our profiles, taking up space and adding unneeded clutter as they are still quite active.
Adding a remove function has got to be a relatively simple thing for CH to do. A quick win to appease many including myself who find this a small albeit annyoing and quite fixable problem.
-
re: magic
MGZ
Dec 17, 2012 09:15 AM
Perhaps the solve is to simply delete whatever one contributed to the thread?
I just can't help but wonder why it's such a big deal? I mean, you can ignore it or open it and then immediately hit the back arrow or move to something else. What does that take up, two to three seconds of your day?
-
-
-
-
-
LindaWhit
Dec 14, 2012 01:39 PM
No, you're not. Check this link in Thursday's update - looks like an "unsubscribe" will be added hopefully early next year.
›5 Replies-
-
re: LindaWhit
JoanN
Dec 15, 2012 09:06 AM
It is my understanding that mudaba's use of the word "subscribe" in this context refers specifically to e-mail notifications. Currently, one may choose either to receive or not to receive e-mail notifications alerting them to new posts made to a thread to which they have contributed; receipt of notifications only for specific threads is not now an option, although it may be early next year.
This has nothing at all to do with with the ability to eliminate an individual thread from the list of "discussions" to which you have contributed. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't recall having seen a post by anyone in authority saying this is something we should expect to see any time soon.
