22 sats \ 9 replies \ @MerryOscar 23 Apr 2022 \ on: Daily discussion thread
Forgot to boost this post - #22303
@k00b would it be possible to include the boost / forwarding options in the edit panel?
I just did the same; I was actually trying to see if a boost was mandatory...but then, it just...worked (with 0 boost)!
Looks like somebody just spotted you 1K big-ones! You lucked out. We'll never know who it was. Could be anybody. Anybody at all really. lol.
reply
I just did the same as well. I thought there was a mandatory minimum, but both posts went through with 0 sats. Now I can't boost. May just delete and repost later.
reply
Boost is not necessary. That's why it's in the 'options' panel. Is that unclear?
reply
This language pops up...
must be at least 1000
...and it goes red. Unless you remove it completely. Kind of non-standard, or just oddly subjective UX, IMO.
I couldn't reason about why the choice would be from the set
{0, 1000, 1001, 1002, ...}. I would have expected any positive integer if it was actually optional.reply
Hmmm I can see why that'd be confusing. I'm just not sure how to design it otherwise. Any ideas?
reply
...right now, you kind of have like a Schrödinger-cat equivalent of a None/Zero.
Maybe subtle change to the form validation logic:
Current:
- {Negative Integer} -> Red ->
"must be at least 1000" - {None} -> Yellow -> lets you post
- {0, ..., 999} -> Red ->
"must be at least 1000" - {1000, ...} -> Yellow -> lets you post
Proposed:
- {Negative Integer} -> Red ->
"must be 0 or at least 1000" - {None, 0} -> Yellow -> lets you post
- {1, ..., 999} -> Red ->
"must be 0 or at least 1000" - {1000, ...} -> Yellow -> lets you post
reply
Ah I get it! I just need to say 0 is allowed!
reply
Awesome thank you anonymous booster! 😁
reply
Yes, definitely possible. Just somewhat complicated so I haven't done it yet. There's an issue up on GH for it.
reply