litphoria

A friend and I have noticed that when we mark a profile as read - such as each others' - that character's name appears crossed out for us.

That doesn't make much sense though. Crossed out would correspond better to someone ignored or marked as Not Interesting (as in slimCat). I'd rather not have the names of people I'm interested in crossed out!

I'm not sure what to suggest in place of the cross-out. I suppose that should be left to comments to mention.

According to the feedback that asked for the feature the intent was explicitly to act like "Not Interesting". Do you think that it should just hide them from search results rather than also having their name crossed out?

This is currently the only functionality of marking as read, to give a visual indication you've already seen the profile and needn't click it again. While it would be possible to hide them in search results, it comes up with a few problems:

1. If the server does it, then searching will probably not scale very well
2. If the client does it, then searching will have "holes" in it. If you've marked the first six or so results of a page as "read" then you'd only get 14 returned on a search that should normally give you 20.

I should also mention there is no difference in the intended use of slimCat's "not interesting" and litphoria's "read" other than I found the latter a more intuitive name to users.

It may be more appropriate to mark it as "not interesting" then and just make sure it's explained in the profile tutorials.

'Not interesting' would do fine. There's just some dissonance right now, because...

Wrecked Avent: I should also mention there is no difference in the intended use of slimCat's "not interesting" and litphoria's "read" other than I found the latter a more intuitive name to users.

.... 'read' is an intuitive name, but not for the functionality of crossing someone out.

On other services I'd appreciate a "mark read" function, but that's not necessary here in my eyes. I'm bad at remembering names and excellent at remembering faces and pictures. Litphoria shows both avatars and names right at the top of play, and that's awesome - I immediately know who I have and haven't seen before.

So, 'not interested' would do fine.

I'd like to see the strike-through removed, also. It might be okay for indicating that I'm not interested in that person, but it's kind of distracting to see the strike-through, which almost indicates I actively don't like this person. Plus, I would like to be able to mark someone as "Profile read, interested." So, to do both might be accomplished with an up-arrow symbol or down-arrow symbol next to their names. Thus this would indicate that I have read their profile, and was interested, or not-interested in the past. And that does help a lot for characters that change their avatar image from time to time. Plus, the same-name issue.

Isn't this feedback already implemented?

Anyway, referring to the original feedback that is now marked as implemented, I wish it had been implement more like it asked for.
Personally, I'd like to (in order of importance):
- mark as uninteresting (possibly indicate this status to me in some way on the name in chatsp; don't include in search results.)
- mark as read (possibly indicate this status on the name in chats)
- mark as interesting (possibly indicate this status on the name in chats, add a profile sort that lists all such profiles.)
- if bookmarking is implemented, then that serves the same purposes as mark as interesting and might include unique name-indication.
Possibly, the chat indicator is at least just a "have read profile" indicator that is shown if any of the above marks are applied.

Yes, this has been implemented. Since the button currently has no effect, I'm requesting that it be removed until such time that it actually has some effect.

It was not intentional for it to stop crossing names out. It doesn't do much without that, so removing the cross-out effect doesn't make a lot of sense.

But it probably needs to be renamed, at the least. I recall originally being on the fence of calling it 'read' or 'uninteresting' but 'uninteresting' was quite long and didn't seem as straight-forward. 'read' implies other things that isn't accurate though, like if the profile is changed, does the 'read' mark get removed? Logically it would, since it's no longer read, but in practice it does not.

Well the original complaint was that the behaviour that came from it corresponded better to "mark as not interesting", but "mark as read" is something you'd apply to friends and stuff too and you don't want their names crossed out everywhere.

I recall it did stop crossing names out soon after this suggestion was made.

Also in case it's relevant it came from this feedback here: mark profiles as read or not interesting (litphoria.com):

Mark profiles as "read" or "not interesting" (implemented)

I'd like to be able to indicate that a profile is not interesting to me to avoid seeing it in future search results, as well as otherwise know when I've already read a given profile.

That's kinda two suggestions in one, but it seems like we got the implementation of the first with the messaging of the second.

It'd make sense if the button struck names out and was named "mark as not interesting", but for months now it's just been an "I've read this" flag.

I never use the mark as read button because I don't want to see crossed-out names everywhere. That was a not-good idea. I'd rather see the name shown as a dimmer or different color or see some symbol next to it. Good alternatives, suggestions, and new ideas have already been posted previously.

The mark as read button no longer crosses out a name, so I'm updating this to Implemented.

There are current requests to:

• Add back a mark as not interesting button: bring back mark as not interesting (litphoria.com)
• Remove the mark as unread button: remove the mark as read button from profiles since it does nothing (litphoria.com)

In that second request, Wrecked Avent expressed interest in exploring what we could use a mark as read button for, as opposed to removing it entirely. I invite readers to open a new feature request if they have an idea for that.