bc's dashboard

bc replied on June 20, 2009 20:00 to the question "Twitter from multiple PCs" in Twitter:

For me it's been this way for a lot longer than two weeks, and despite there being at least three threads on this topic here, Twitter has not responded, explained, or even acknowledged the change.

Such arrogant, callous treatment of users is one of the reasons I don't encourage friends and associates to use Twitter, and why my usage has been declining for the last year.

Just saying.

bc started following the question "Twitter from multiple PCs" in Twitter.

A comment on the problem "Every time I open the Twitter web site, I have to log in again" in Twitter:

Address? I'd go into shock if Twitter even *acknowledged* it. No response whatsoever. As far as Twitter users are concerned, this entire forum is a complete waste of time, apparently.

But hey, as the old saying goes - you get what you pay for, right? – bc, on June 10, 2009 23:17

A comment on the problem "Plurk Mobile not working." in Plurk:

As so often happens. :) – bc, on May 13, 2009 23:15

bc reported a problem in Plurk on May 13, 2009 20:14:

Plurk Mobile not working.

Can't load any pages via plurk mobile; redirects to an error page. First noticed around mid-morning US EDT.

bc started following the question "Keep getting logged out at home when I log in at another location!" in Twitter.

bc reported a problem in Twitter on March 20, 2009 01:47:

Login "remember me" not working

The Twitter login page option to "remember me" no longer works. It's UNBELIEVABLY ANNOYING to have to log in every single time I try to load my and every other Twitter user's page. Is something broken and being fixed, or is it supposed to be some kind of new security "feature?"

I've deleted and refreshed all Twitter cookies, doesn't help. I see the problem with four different web browsers and on three different computers. I also saw another thread here - started over a month ago - where other people reported the same problem, with no response from anyone within the company.

Twitter - please explain. If you need more details I will be happy to provide.

Thanks.

bc started following the problem "Every time I open the Twitter web site, I have to log in again" in Twitter.

bc started following the problem "CAN YOU SEE ME WHEN YOU PULL UP MY TIMELINE?" in Plurk.

A comment on the question "Plurk Mobile view's "next" link disabled?" in Plurk:

Thanks to the Plurk team for the fix :) (applause) – bc, on January 27, 2009 21:13

bc asked a question in Plurk on January 26, 2009 13:51:

Plurk Mobile view's "next" link disabled?

Mobile view shows only one "page" of recent plurks. Previously the "next" link showed older plurks in my timeline; now that link is disabled. Is this a temporary change and if so, when will this work again?

bc replied on January 07, 2009 15:38 to the problem "Bug with certain emotes in series?" in Plurk:

More testing shows me that any of several extra-set emotes followed by a basic set emote will cause the display of 1st emote to fail. (annoyed)

bc reported a problem in Plurk on January 07, 2009 15:30:

Bug with certain emotes in series?

If I put this text in a plurk:
is testing (idiot) (angry)
This is what I see:


Since I have more than 10 users invited to plurk I do have access to the "idiot" emote, and use it all the time. Should I not see the correct pair of emotes?

bc asked a question in Plurk on December 22, 2008 02:56:

Plurk timeline jumps forward then back by an hour?

What's wrong with this picture? ... 9:03pm, 9:02pm, 9:01pm ... 10pm? Then 9pm? Is this a symptom of some kind of timeline bug?

bc replied on December 20, 2008 18:19 to the problem "Responses not being updated" in Plurk:

Amir, thanks for explaining.

A comment on the problem "Responses not being updated" in Plurk:

Actually - simply put, it seems like Plurk is now capping new responses at 50 when the page loads, and marking excess as read. Is that by design? – bc, on December 20, 2008 15:58

bc replied on December 20, 2008 15:47 to the problem "Responses not being updated" in Plurk:

Alvin, there's definitely still something wrong with new plurk and/or response handling. At a minimum, responses are getting marked as read without being seen. I have two screen shots that show exactly what I mean.

I left my browser open for a while and accumulated 90+ new responses. Here's a screen shot:


Note the number in the lower left. First problem indication is that number dropped by 30 when I closed and re-opened my browser (see next pic). I didn't view any plurks or mark any as read, yet the number went from 90s to 60s in less than two minutes. I took the first screen shot, closed the browser, re-opened, browsed to plurk, clicked "My plurks" and took the second screen shot. Somewhere in that process I lost 30 unread plurks/responses. That's a problem.



You can see the first "My plurks" view shows four plurks with new responses, while the second image shows only three. I didn't click on that plurk or mark as read, yet its "new" responses went away. This is repeatable behavior, and unless this arbitrary marking as read is supposed to be some kind of feature, it's a problem. :)

A comment on the problem "Responses not being updated" in Plurk:

Alvin, are you saying the responses problems are supposed to be fixed in non-mobile view? – bc, on December 20, 2008 06:16

bc replied on December 18, 2008 20:41 to the problem "Responses not being updated" in Plurk:

Also, might be another symptom of same problem but - that number of responses (50 something) I noted several hours ago? When I opened a browser and loaded my timeline a few minutes ago, it had dropped into the 30s without my viewing any or marking as read since the earlier check.

A comment on the problem "Responses not being updated" in Plurk:

Still seeing way less than usual new plurks and responses. I understand what you're saying about existing plurks not auto-correcting without new replies, but it still seems way off. A typical weekday morning I see hundreds of new plurks and responses. I just checked - after roughly four hours away - and I had 55. Normally that would be well over 250. – bc, on December 18, 2008 17:18