erm n the green and black theme all posts are the same color … the typeface is white on a black background … I’ve never seen colored backgrounds or font
Oh, i misunderstood your post. I guess we agree
So, for you, What_Exit’s Post #29 in this thread (which has a yellow background for me) doesn’t look any different from any of the other posts in the thread?
This is black on white for you?
What theme are you using? I thought every theme showed the staff color. I’m pretty sure they do.
And/Or what browser?
This is on Windows 10 using Chrome:
Dark:
Normal post background is black, staff color is a lovely shade of poop brown, text is white.
Discourse Classic:
Normal post background is white, staff color is yellow, text is black.
graceful:
Normal post background is white, staff color is a light green that on my monitor is difficult to distinguish from a gray quote box unless you look carefully, text is black.
Material Design Theme:
Normal post background is white, staff color is yellow, text is black.
Minima:
Normal post background is white, staff color is yellow, text is black.
Sam’s Simple Theme:
Normal post background is white, staff color is yellow, text is black.
Straight Dope Dark:
Normal post background is black, staff color is an ugly greenish-yellow that is probably best described as bile colored, text is white.
Straight Dope Light:
Normal post background is white, staff color is yellow, text is black.
Vincent:
Normal post background is black, staff color is also black, text is grayish-white.
TL/DR: On the graceful theme the staff color is easy to miss, on the Vincent theme the staff color is non-existent, and on all of the other themes the staff color is easy to see.
Vincent does make a change, but it’s very minor. It adds a thin orange bar to the left of the post. It’s quite easy to miss.
Sounds like Vincent should be fixed or eliminated.
What’s the point of staff color if it doesn’t work in every theme?
I’ve had at least one, and I think two warnings for something similar, which forced me to change the way I use the board.
I normally start reading, and if something is addressed to me I try to answer it right away, because sometimes I get a lot of responses and reading to the end first means I have to back and start looking for all the things I have to reply to, and sometimes I miss one.
But more than once I’ve been reading, replied to someone then later on in the thread discovered a mod note forbidding the subject, along with an official warning to me for violating the rule.
So now I have to read the entire thread, then go back again and try to answer the earlier stuff. Not a big deal, and it’s probably better that way, but it is sometimes annoying. Especially when you miss someone’s comment and get pitted for ‘ignoring’ their imporrtant rebuttal.
There’s a nice middle ground. As you read through a thread quote posts, or parts of posts, but just let them sit in the reply box until you get to the end of the thread. Now you don’t have to go back and find them and if you remove quotes that, upon reading further in the thread you find you no longer need to reply to them (ie someone else said what you were going to say, a mod asked people not to respond to that quote/poster etc), you can delete it.
It’s like jotting down notes during a lecture to ask the teacher about after class, but then crossing them off if they happened to get answered before the end of the lecture.
My preliminary answer to this removed before posting, because @Joey_P just said it for me. Excellent example of why it makes sense to use that technique.
That is way too much trouble for a leisure activity. I think I’d rather have the warning than have to go through constant revision.
This is what i do, too.
I don’t usually end up revising anything. But i have the option. You might give it a try once or twice and see if it isn’t easier than you expect.
Multiquoting doesn’t work very well on my phone (iOS Brave browser.)
When I highlight text and hit the quote button, a post editor window appears. But if I minimize it, sometimes it vanishes entirely. And if I then quote something else, I get a new editing window without the original quote. Sometimes there are error messages.
This is actually something the old board software handled extremely well.
But this may be something to go into elsewhere where the developers may choose to chime in.
In general, mid-thread custom rulemaking is a poor practice that I’ve never seen on other boards.
How about mid-thread reminders of what the rule are, or what the topic of the thread is? 
Actually, what this board does that i haven’t seen elsewhere is enforce that threads stay on-topic. A large fraction of mod notes to everyone are about trying to keep the thread on-topic.
If you suspended me for a day every time I participated in a hijack, I and others would probably straighten up right quick. A hijack is a hijack whether or not a mod has declared it so. Would it be less work than constant reminders? I can’t say. Keeping GD/P&E and news threads on track seems exhausting.
I don’t think this board software has an automatic “Poster was suspended for this post” label.
It’s really not too much trouble. In fact, I’d argue that, even ignoring any moderation issues you might run into, it’s considerably easier to do it this way than to read the entire thread and then go back and find the posts you wanted to reply to.
Also, it’s not like you have to be actively editing your post. Just hit the reply/quote button on things you want to reply to, then when you get to the end you can decide what you still want to reply to and what you no longer want/need to address.
I mean, you do you, I just can’t see how this method, which only involves reading the thread a single time, is going to be less work than your method.
Especially considering your made multiple mentions of being annoyed about having to read the thread twice.
So, you don’t want to read the entire thread twice, but you also don’t want to read it once?
I suppose you said pretty much exactly that…
Just remember that you said that. If you continue to get warnings for this, you don’t get to play the victim and act like you’re part of some group that the mods routinely target.
Surely, after a decade+ of being a member here you’re aware that this board isn’t terribly forgiving of the ‘I didn’t feel like reading the entire thread’ mentality.
I didn’t say that. I’ve no idea where you’re getting that idea from. I’m annoyed that I was expected to check replies immediately after making a post, just in case the thread had been moderated while I was composing my post. I had other things to do, and after I completed my post, I went away from my computer and did them. I came back a while later to look at those replies, and then found out that one of them was a moderator instruction, and also that I’d received a warning for not following an instruction I hadn’t yet seen.
I’m disappointed the moderator’s reaction was to issue a warning, rather than presume I hadn’t seen his note. Now that it’s happened, I probably will make a point, at least for a while, of seeing if I’ve been replied to by a moderator after I’ve made a post. But I’m also probably going to be less inclined to debate in Politics & Elections anyways. If I’m going to be shut down for arguing my opinion, then there doesn’t seem to be much point in engaging in debate.
IANAM, but I would think that if you had PM’d the mod, telling them you missed the note and asking them to hide your post, rather than calling them out in ATMB, they’d have been much more likely to rescind the warning.
Is that really what you think happened here?
I think there’s more to the initial moderator note than just your, my and Lance_Turbo’s discussion of the HEROES act. However, that’s not why I raised this thread, and would probably be off-topic. This thread is asking about the expectation for seeing a moderator’s note. I appreciate the posters who have made topical suggestions towards that expectation.