Please feel free to give any feedback on site navigation on this thread - any suggestions for improvement or just plain old gripes about things you find confusing, difficult or disorienting are welcome.
If possible, please send any bug reports by email to admin@stockopedia.co.uk or via this Contact Us Form: http://www.stockopedia.co.uk/page/contacting-stockopedia/
Best,
M
but do you know where to look?
Get the most concise synopsis of everything that's been proven to work in value investing. If you like your stocks cheap you've found a treasure trove distilled to under 70 pages.
- How to find ultimate Bargain Stocks with Ben Graham
- How to spot Turnarounds and avoid Value Traps
- From Graham to Greenblatt via Piotroski & Lakonishok
- How to value stocks and set a margin of safety
Disclaimer:
As per our Terms of Use, Stockopedia is a financial news & data site, discussion forum and content aggregator. Our site should be used for educational & informational purposes only. We do not provide investment advice, recommendations or views as to whether an investment or strategy is suited to the investment needs of a specific individual. You should make your own decisions and seek independent professional advice before doing so. Remember: Shares can go down as well as up. Past performance is not a guide to future performance & investors may not get back the amount invested.
81 Posts on this Thread show/hide all
my thumbs have vanished (frostbite?)
db
In reply to doverbeach, post #62
No problem with mine - as demonstrated ;-)
Which browser/OS are you using?
Mine have just returned!
db
I have none with Firefox
In reply to jonnyt, post #65
I'm using Firefox and my thumbs are fine .....AND (more importantly for me) the show/hide options buttons seems to be working again!
No thunbs up/down icons for me anymore. Am using IE and Vista.
No thumbs up or down for me either, and I'm using google chrome.
Ah ha they have just reappeared...:) they certain;y weren't there earlier..
I'm with firefox and thumbs not working.
Sorry to rejuvinate an old thread.
Would it be possible to have a filter for TA-based discussion? Or a category for it such that it would be possible not to see it unless you wished to do so.
Or if this is possible at the moment can anyone kindly let me know how.
jseth123,
I concur with your queries.
I'm also finding the disproportionate us of capitals very distracting, bordering on ramping, or am I alone in this?
In reply to fuiseog, post #71
When I hit the new reply button, the option to "show the text editor" disappears. Obviously not ideal!
Can U fix please?
...not you fuiseog, obviously!
It would also help if there was an "always available" link for reporting bugs as there used to be. I can never remember the email address they should be sent to!
In reply to emptyend, post #72
This one is fixed! As long as the editor has not been loaded into another textarea then you can load it directly under the comment you are replying to - we've added the 'show text editor link'. Hope that helps!
In reply to promethean, post #74
yup thats fine thanks! :-)
Can someone please tell me why my temporary password is not recognized when I try to create a new password
Quick question, although I suspect there is no solution.
Is there anyway, when selecting "Discussion-all activity" to limit one's feed to only those messages where there are comments and not just some brokers speel/research document.
Whilst it is occasionally nice to read some of what the input it does seem that they tend to post 4-7 such research reports all on the same day which, if one goes away for more than two days often means one has to trawl through endless separate posts to get to what one wants....Or perhaps there is a better way to keep tabs on th threads I'm interested in?Open to suggestions.
Cheers for suggs in advance
Hi, the best (or rather the intended) way is to "follow" stocks and authors that you're interested in, and then click on the Favourites button at the top here (http://www.stockopedia.co.uk/discussion/) to just see that list. Let us know though if the Favourite filter is not obvious enough or doesn't do what you want.
Alternatively, if you click on the "Threads" button on that page, it will just give you back Threads. Also, you can click on each button to choose everything other than Research, if you want.
Best,
M
Ah ha cheers Murakami, That's perfect. Problem solved.
Mucho gratias.
Could I please return to a couple of previously raised ideas which seem to have gone nowhere.
1) We really do need an "ignore this poster" feature - without this trolls can hijack threads, pollute discussion and disincentivise participation
2) There need to be sanctions/penalties imposed on people who persistently engage in disruptive/anti-social behaviour - perhaps this could be triggered by negative thumbs - or perhaps it should just be managed by the Stockopedia site managers. The absence of such sanctions means that anti-social behaviour has no consequence for those who do it.
3) The league table of "top posters" needs to exclude those who make negative contributions - someone who posts a thousand inaccurate/dishonest/stupid/disruptive comments should not thereby get themselves at the top of the league table.
T
In reply to tournesol, post #80
Hello Tournesol,
I strongly agree that something is needed, and I think the lack of consequences particularly needs to change.
Ignore buttons are of limited use-ADVFN has one and has more trolls than Norway.
I can ignore a known troll/crackpot and simply pass by their post, but if posters I value then respond to the troll, I waste time reading the response, which may even include quotes from the trollpost, thus forcing me to read the very rubbish I'm trying to ignore!
So perhaps step one is not to respond-don't feed 'em!
However, sometimes a post may include an unwarranted attack on someone's character/motivation/integrity.which of course arouses the desire to leap to the victim's defense. But that is just where the thread gets hijacked. So it might be better to simply report the post, but then there must be consequences. .Perhaps a warning and a "three strikes and you're ou t" (banned), unless a (graceful) apology is forthcoming? The question is, of course, who decides and administers this?
I would suggest that attacks on the person should be treated much more severely than posts which are simply silly or ill-informed.
Thoughts, Stockopedia? I really think it is time to address this.
w