Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
It wasn't argumentative in any way.It merely identified the realities.
iHub once owned SI. Each entity operated on its own servers.
Possible, though logging out (by clicking logout) should ostensibly do that.
We’re doing both. There’s a ton of stuff in the pipeline.
The trades issue is related to the whole login/authentication mess.
It’s good to be the king.
That may well be. And it’s a sword that will cut both ways.
Alleged misrepresentations are a matter for debate, not for monitoring or moderation. We have neither the resources not expertise to monitor for alleged to be misrepresentations.
It is the privilege a duty of each reader to assess and debut/debate content with which they disagree. The answer for disagreeable speech is more speech.
Uh oh. Something in read_msg seems to have gone amiss.
You mean libelous (written) not slanderous (spoken).
And you omitted an important adjective: allegedly
That is a matter between the allegedly libeled parties, the poster(s) and a court of competent jurisdiction. We are not arbiters of truth and do not assess what is true or false, and by extension what is or is not libelous. If and when a court finds certain content to be defamatory or otherwise actionable and issues a ruling and order to that effect, we would take such an order under advisement. It's worth nothing that under current law, US-based interactive computer services cannot be ordered to to remove defamatory content, though they can certainly do so if they wish.
The metrics say that discussion/chat investment community at large wants more flexibility for and less moderation of content. It's not just iHub; this debate has been raging for years at many levels; within social media itself, in the mainstream media, in state and federal legislatures, etc. Many argue for more content moderation, many argue for less.
Content moderation is hard at any scale, but the larger the scale the harder it is. Each and every decision to remove or not remove content to which someone objects pisses off some and makes others happy.
We've always had two principle drivers for content moderation; 1) we do not moderate content on the basis of investment sentiment expressed by the author, and 2) we are not arbiters of truth and do not moderate content on the basis of its alleged veracity (truthfulness). We defer to each reader to assess the veracity of what they read for themselves. Our moderation policies have to do mostly with conduct, not subjective content. Conduct rules are by their very nature less exact and subjection to different interpretations, and therein lies the core problem with content moderation. Tastes great vs. less filling. There are some limited exceptions where we draw a more distinct line in the sand, such as discussion about minors, threats of physical harm, and violations of privacy.
Rules beget people who live for the opportunity to test the limits of the rules, which often results in more rules. It's a vicious cycle that results in "rule creep." It's not a concept limited to social media; just look at the massively bloated US Code or any state/local government's laws and statutes. The government statute books have become so bloated that we're now in an age of "show me a man and I'll show you a crime."
There is no right or wrong answer to this. Nevertheless, sometimes a house cleaning as we are contemplating is the best albeit painful answer. Just like we're adapting to the times where mobile use eclipses desktop use, we have to adjust to the ever-changing social norms. This is true for every platform, not just iHub. It's just easier for startups because they don't have a legacy to contend with.
I’m away on PTO, but see on our developers channel the “fix” for that was just made live today.
We’ll take the W anyway.
What browser are you using? I see all of the button labels and tooltips.
We haven't pushed out anything today. What page are you getting timed out?
Patience. Takes almost half an hour to do a deploy every time we make a code change at this layer.
Rinse. Repeat. Revert. Will be back to normal in a few minutes.
It's because the "Livewire" navigation we use for Next/Prev that prevents reloading the entire page (not the keyboard N/P nav) wasn't updating the browser history. Which was less than optimal on many levels.
It got fixed, other than the Keep issue, then the fix got inadvertently removed the other day so Bad Things started to happen again, like visited posts not showing a visited in the browser (since they weren't getting updated).
In theory everything should be working now. I'll deny having said that if proven wrong.
It's back to where it was at the market close.
Earlier today we pushed the fix for Keep taking you back a few posts if you were using Next/Prev right before keeping a post.
Yes, it was. Oops
Little problem with update. It's being reverted and may be a little slow for a bit.
We’re going to look at that. There’s several work around in the interim.
You can disable auto refresh in settings/site options.
You can change the timer for auto refresh so it’s less frequent.
You can hit refresh so the page reload before you start typing.
Or if it is a longer post you can use the full editor.
Sure, just click the full editor button and use that instead.
That will be included in the next update/
Ticker highlighting
t tags MSFT
$tag (manual) $MSFT
Another
AMZN
$MSFT
That's inevitable.Don't have an ETA though.
testing
$msft
Full editor allows preview and edit prior to submission. Better for more comprehensive posts.
It's not about twitter links. It's about users who link to their Twitter account to automatically post their iHub posts to Twitter. That has to go through Twitter's API and they have decided they will only allow that for $$$$$$.
If Twitter links are slow to load, that's Twitter too. That traffic goes directly from Twitter to the user's browser.
That should be working now. There were a lot of issues stemming from a central networking cause, and that's been fixed.
Famous last words....
We've been investigating. Looks like it's interwebs issues crossing the Atlantic.
We haven't changed anything. That's Twitter changing their API rules. Feel free to take it up with Elon.
Test post #2
Test post for board warning