October 20th, 2004

cute but psycho

FAQ 134 (https://www.livejournal.com/support/faq/134.html) - comments - suggested addition

Suggested addition to the first paragraph of FAQ 134, "What is comment screening? How do I set my screening options?":

Comment screening is a method of preventing abuse, which allows account holders to control the circumstances under which comments that are left in their journals are visible to their readers. It is not intended as a way for you to have private or protected conversations in comments. If you do not want the comments you post to be visible to anyone who can see the entry they are posted to, it is suggested that you use a more private method of communication such as instant messages or e-mail.

This is prompted by several recent requests where users are apparently trying to use screening as a way to have "private" or "me-and-the-person-I'm-replying-to-only" comments, and they come to the board shocked when the comment they replied to was unscreened.
  • Current Mood
    bitchy bitchy
  • timwi

[SiteNav] FAQ #148 (http://www.livejournal.com/support/faqbrowse.bml?faqid=148)

In What are LiveJournal's limitations on data?, you state:
Usernames are limited to 15 characters, and passwords are limited to 30 characters. The characters that are allowed in usernames are a-z, 0-9, and the underscore (_). Capitalized letters and the hyphen (-) will be converted to lowercase and the underscore, respectively.
I think it is unwise to mention passwords in the middle of a paragraph which is mainly about usernames. Personally, I would either split this into two sentences:
Usernames are limited to 15 characters, and the characters that are allowed in usernames are a-z, 0-9, and the underscore (_). Capitalized letters and the hyphen (-) will be converted to lowercase and the underscore, respectively. Passwords are limited to 30 characters.
or, alternatively, move the "Passwords are limited to 30 characters" bit to the bulleted list above this paragraph.

Update: In the same FAQ, I think the sentence "Additional posts will cause an error message indicating that the queue is full to be displayed to the user attempting to post." should be rephrased to "Additional posts will cause an error message to be displayed to the user attempting to post indicating that the queue is full."
me

FAQ 76 & 157 (Moderated Posting)

Edit: Currently, we send users to the general FAQ 76, because the language is simpler and the FAQ is shorter. However, that doesn't give the error text "Maximum queued posts for this community+poster combination reached"

There seem to be a few different options.
1. Add the error message to FAQ 76; keep info spread out over 76, 157, 148 (Data limits).
2. Create a separate FAQ with that error message in the title.
3. Pull all info into 76; leave some in 148
4. Pull all info into 76; reference FAQ 76 from 148 (Queued posts are limited as described in "blah FAQ")

Collapse )