In post 1194, Sensei wrote:They link to a different topic. That's more than likely a scumslip.
That actually happens a lot I think. I can recall trying to link to posts in a game before and having my links get screwed up and go elsewhere, although I don't know what triggers it. If you just quote that post and look at the raw text, I think it just has the [ post = ] tags, which should link to the post number within the thread; however, there's something broken with that particular tag. That should be pretty easy to check, by the way, guys. Like ... why are you guys debating whether that's a slip or not? You can just look. Here... I'll open a new window and do it myself while I'm making this post. Be right back (I do enjoy amusing myself).
Yep ... all throughout the post you guys are talking about, the formatting of the links are as follows:
So, let's see if that topic number in the post= portion of the code is put in by the person or if the forum generates it. I'm going to attempt to link to post #1200 just by doing post=#1200 and see if it adds a topic number, and I'll also try to do it using the button too. My suspicion is that it's going to, since I'm looking at quoted text right now, and it has added in the topic and post number as separate things to link back to the people I'm quoting. When in doubt, science the problem. If it turns out you have to manually try to link to a PT ... then they got some explaining to do, because even though hydras get PTs, the post in question was asserting that it was responding to posts in
this thread
.
Testing:
Post #1200
Testing Again:
1200 <---- hitting the button just brought up [ post ] and [ / post ] tags with the cursor between them, so I put in a post number.
So ... after previewing the results, if I do the following code, it goes to some other topic, although it appears to be a very old topic, and thus probably does not explain the situation:
Code: Select all
Testing: [post=#1200]Post #1200[/post]
If you hover over the post button, that's actually the syntax it tells you to use, but that's clearly broken.
The second result appears to work, and that was using the code as follows:
However ... if you quote this post and look, you will see that the forum system parsed that and added in a topic number. Still... it added in the topic number for
this thread
, not a PT somewhere.
Conclusion? They got some explaining to do.
In post 1231, The Cool Cucumbers wrote: In post 1212, pirate mollie wrote: In post 1187, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Hey I'm just glad you're town. I'd like to take a quick moment to mention I'm on an 8 game winning streak rampage
Yeahhhhh!
I have won 21 out of the last 27 town games I have played! I am even counting the cupcake 1 altho that game was bullshit.
hi cerb!
tbh I don't even remember what your exact response was I just felt like it was very hedgy. but I bet i remember what your responses are on this page tho!
"hedgey"
"hedgey"
You know, that's a decent way of describing the way I answered your question(s)(which was, btw, you asking what my thoughts were on your reads), but...it's a markedly different way of describing it than the way Drixx and Titus described it. They were both shocked by me taking firm stances on things....firm stances which you call..."hedgey"
So, umm, which is it guys? Was I taking surprisingly firm stances, or was i being "hedgey"?
-Cerb
You were taking more firm stances than you usually do. Period. Stop playing defense and get on offense. You're weirding me out.
You are making a