Guess/Guest again.......

Yes indeedy.
The style of your replies plus the name did seem like they were genuine...the piles of nut shells falling from the monitor was also a clue.
A guest I.D is a good idea, but is it technically possible to impliment IT wise without guest having to have some sort of temporary id/password? In which case he may as well sign up. ...I dunno about these things.
Without a password you may get an admittedly unlikely scenario...two guests posting from the same PC or more likely one guest posting from multiple locations...

Or do you visuallise a sort of voluntary but compulsary system...I know that sounds like a contradiction, but I mean a guest has to put in an ID but it's not verified by password.

My furry liitle brain is hurties now..can I have more tea & toast?

Del

Or do you visuallise a sort of voluntary but compulsary system

A bit like when you fill out some on-line forms where there is a 'required field'. Next to the 'Submit' button, a place to enter a signature of choice. An 'honesty box', if you like, so that visitors enter a helpful signature. You can't submit a post as Guest unless you give some identifier of your own choice. The note by the box will ask posters to use the same moniker/number to help readers see which guest is which. Open to abuse, but it would help casual visitors do the 'right' thing. Our contender below, post 2 by WIAG≠0, has the idea. Not a password or registration, just a simple identifier that gets displayed on whatever is posted.

I'm sure that lovely mgaulin chap has his work cut out, but the little box might help solve some issues. It would also encourage regular Guests to register, and never have to see the 'name' prompting box. The anon box would be automatic, and not link the post to the members visible detail.

eg "Guest : toobigawordshouldhaveusedsomethingeasytorememberandtype"

and "Anon ijkl"

Of course you can have more tea and toast (though whether your vet would approve I can't say). The issue of whether you may have more tea and toast is beyond my control. Because of grammatical/spilling problems, I usually have a soft boiled Truss with soldiers and a little salt.

Does the normal means breaking bathtubs/teasing Giorgia/Making Snhats ?

I am not clicking in the virus site linked due to obvious reasons

At the given time , I have checked, the number of guest to host ratio is like virus ie one host will have a few million (exaggarated but at least 4 viruses guests.

Now under this condition, when all are attacking one host thread it is difficut to tell now this is HIV#4 and now this one is HIV#2809354 (in fact like us they too don't like to be called names ) They may call names of course (since number of hosts are much less)

So putting them the number WAG# will be like the WAG# of Ronaldo .

Signed

WIAG#0

My dear WIAG#0,

You have an admirable grasp of the concept !

The virus thing can be goggled quite easily if you have worries, although goggle may record your worries for targeted advertising.

Under my proposed scheme, you can be whoever you wish to be. I quite like WIAG≠0, and it would be most in keeping with said proposal if you retained it during this thread. As far as I know, HamiltonBadBoy is currently available. Should anyone using it attract the attention of a foxy gal, then please notify me of her contact details. I will see to it that she is handled appropriately.

Kris,

I was a bit surprised to see your name signed to a guest post. The reference to Bruce Willis made it appear genuine so I didn't question. I assumed you were on the road and couldn't log in for some reason. Of course, if you had said something grossly out of character, I might have wondered if it was some other 'Kris'....

Also, I've seen some regular folks sometimes post as guest and sign at the bottom as you did. For reasons speculated above.

Guest ID's is not a bad idea. I would not oppose it.

It's true, artsmith, you can never be sure when a member only signs their name. I haven't timed how long it takes to sign in, but I'd guess in the region of 2-3 seconds.

Who knows what mischief may have been wrought in my name, but no matter - it applies to us all. On the other hand, it was exquisite agony to get a GA vote as Guest-Kris . Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, although Mrs K usually does it with an Iron or a Frying Pan !

On my home PC my connection is so slow it can take up to 5 minutes to sign in. Took about three minutes just to get this reply window to open...

Good point, Steve.

Thanks for taking the trouble to mention this. It seems that a lot of people in North America have slow connection speed. If enough of them mention that here, it might help Admin in any changes they might make. I don't think the suggestion need add to the access time, since it's no more than a prompt to enter an identifying name. ie - it doesn't have to cookie-track a Guest movements/mail setting as it would with people logged in.

Personally I'd sooner live with the present situation than have one the makes it difficult for people to access CR4. Because of the population density etc, Europe's infrastructure is pretty good for access speeds.

I can now thank you, and annoy sb at the same time !

It seems we all have a different experience with CR4. I turn on my PC, goto email, click on a reply to a thread, and I'm already logged on (it says Member: StandardsGuy in the right end of the red bar). If I use another PC, it's a whole different situation. I am unable to log in no matter what I do. Also when posting a reply, half the stuff at the top of the message box is grayed out such as the hyperlink button. On the last thread, the spell checker said everything was OK, but there were misspelled words.

I use both work and home computers to try to annoy people here. Both now automatically sign me in as bob c, unless I check to post anonymously. I do have trouble from time to time with the spell checker not functioning. I just try again, and it has always worked on the second try.

Interesting.......so how do we grade, are we as arogant as some guests imply.

and what is this?

I shall now revert to normal

says you

kris

doh! did't log out

"grade"

?

Not sure that fits into the topic . It's purely about being able to make sense of who says what to who. All the intermittent griping about the issue is pointless unless a specific solution is proposed. People can either post a yes/no comment, stick a GA somewhere, or nothing at all.

To indicate support for my suggestion, people could use the 'rate' button at the very top. Guests can't, which is a shame - life is sooooo unfair. They could comment, but I'm bogged if I'm going to count which says what !

By 'normal', I meant fully dressed in Avatar and all. Not 'normal' as in rational !

Hi Kris,

with all due respect, if we required guests to go through all these steps, why don't they just as well register properly? after all, they don't have to fill in all the blanks in the registration page. a confirmation eMail is all that's necessary, and they can post and rate just like the rest!

which raises the question, "do our thoughts/ideas on improvements or modifications on how life is lived in this forum ever transformed into reality?"

Hi langyaw,

Yep, it's easy enough to register. For whatever reason, a lot of people don't want to do register. I'd like to 'encourage' them with a few seconds delay in adding a moniker to anything they post. As Steve pointed out (#7), even registered members can experience delays in logging in every time. My proposal would cause that delay to registered members short of time to log-in, but if we see a post with the user info, say, "Guest :Kris" you have slightly more confidence that it's a genuine post from me. People are unlikely to take the p*** by impersonating moi, because they don't know to what extent Admin can track them down. Guest posts could be read in a clearer manner, and people would be given a little more motivation to join.

In life generally, only a small % of thoughts become reality. CR4 Admin seem to take notice as/when good suggestions are made. Only they can decide if something is workable, and only we can let them know if we want a suggestion implemented. Their time/resources are limited (especially when killing innocent pumpkins - OK, that was probably 'staff' rather than 'Admin').

Right now, they could be thinking "Oh crap, not this old chestnut again. Just get on with enjoying the site", but ya never know. CR4 is ever-expanding, and eventually they may have to address the issue of Guests. It's not my baby, but there's no harm in suggesting what colour bonnet would complement it's rosy little cheeks. (I have a truly bizarre image in my head, of the mother getting up to cuddle it in the night, and the various babysitters going cochy-coo.....)

hell

I've been tryin to "unsubscribe" from this newsletter for over a week and can't get it done.

when I register it never shows me, my discussion points never get printed, etc. etc .etc.

kinda lke I died but neither satan nor God wants me.

I just mass delete notification stuff, so no problem on that.

The telepathic reply system is one I've not discovered yet. Might be my tin-foil hat blocking the signals. If you do Ctrl + Print Screen, you can paste into ms Paint and print from there. I have a fine collection of "What's this Pizza" ready for next Christmas family games.

....neither satan nor God wants me

Aw, don't despair - maybe they both want you, and just can't agree on who gets you yet.

Dear All,

I believe it is a matter of personal choice. At the end of the day if one wants to contact the : guest or the member ( who usually , and , in the majority of cases uses a : pseudonym) they can contact the author through the CR4 services.

In conclusion lets all avoid suffereing from :

post-traumatic stress disorder.

Labor Omnia Vincit

Sorry, Edgar, we cannot contact you through CR4. I can guess that you might be in or from Oklahoma because you signed with our state motto. The powers behind CR4 might be able to contact you if they saved your IP address.

BTW, Edgar is the generic name I give to all guests unless they sign with a name. It is based on Edgar Guest, commentator from St. Louis. If you don't like being called Edgar, sign up and log in.

LOL !

When Guests don't give a name, that a pretty good idea. Unless any changes to the system occur, I may follow your idea and address Guests without names as 'Edgar'. It has added merit because of the use of similarity to "Ed Wood", used by directors a little embarrassed about how a film turns out. A pseudonym for something pretty awful. Guest has a certain 'charm' . Using Edgar is also an nicely pseudo-naive way of getting Guests to proffer a name.

Exactly - it's a matter of choice. Do we help Guests from unwittingly causing confusion, or not ?

It could be as simple as a pop up box when you hit the "Preview Comment" button - anyone not logged in would get a reminder ; "Have you added a name ? - it will help others in knowing which posts are from you".

One little pop-up box, to help aleviate a source of annoyance to many.

Brick-dust-on-forehead.

Welcome back. Actually, we were all wondering why you kept posting as "Guest".

There's madness in my method

Due to the nature of it's conduct had you been hit by the conflicker virus why would know?

Sorry Kris I already answered you here

So we are agreed that if nothing else the guest moniker should be changed to Edgar..

I will post this suggestion in the CR4 Feedback.

Not Rodney?

How about instead of "guest", they are all called "ASS***E"!!

We could even add numbers like "ASS***E01", "ASS***E02"!! etc etc etc.....

That might put them off a bit!!!

Is not possible for CR4 to check the IP of a guest and give it a handle accordingly?

that why we can at least see which Guest is replying to whch guest

I tried suggesting that last time the Guest thing came up. Maybe Admin don't want to advertise the fact that they check for IP address. Also, automatically assigning Guests a name is a whole different thing - it would require a tracking cookie for the name to be retained by each Guest in a thread.

What I'm after, is forcing Guests to enter a name each time they submit a post. It could appear at the bottom of whatever they post, or in the same place that "Guest" currently appears. No invasion of privacy. It's like signing your name in a visitors book. No confirmation or proof required, simply asking that people write the same name each visit. It could be as simple as a pop up box when you hit the "Preview Comment" button - anyone not logged in would get a reminder ; "Have you added a name ? - it will help others in knowing which posts are from you".

Like Andy said maybe if a guest doesn't choose a name the CR4 randomizer will choos a name for him,

E.g. Sparkles, Monkey Wrench, Sludge bunny, pen pusher and so on

Sod it....

anyone not logged in would get a reminder ; "Have you added a name ? - it will help others in knowing which posts are from you".

If mgaulin can't manage that, and/or Chris doesn't want him to, that's fine. It doesn't matter to me if a well-intentioned guest is lost in the mire. The Edgars can continue to cause/be confusional waste. _{<.....stomps off in a pretend huff.......>}

OR - the guest moniker (as well as the Posts = 2) can provide one an easy assessment of how much effort to put into responding to some half-defined mangled request for all the information on the planet?

I find it takes a little more encouragement for me to reply to most "guests"