Change 'Entry is backdated' option's title

Mar 31, 2005 09:29


Title
Change 'Entry is backdated' option's title

Short, concise description of the idea
Change title of the 'Entry is backdated' option on the Update form to 'Entry is non-chronological'.

Full description of the ideaThe current title of the 'Entry is backdated' option causes a lot of confusion for people due to its name. The name makes people assume ( Read more... )

date out of order / backdate, site copy, § implemented differently

Leave a comment

Comments 14

kunzite1 April 1 2005, 09:12:09 UTC
melikes this idea.
i too have no clue what to call it.

Reply


livredor April 1 2005, 09:49:01 UTC
Yep yep. I think 'out of order' might be easier to understand than 'non-chronological', although that does have the disadvantage of possibly suggesting 'broken' out of context. Hmm.

Reply

asciident April 1 2005, 09:52:53 UTC
Then perhaps "out of chronological order"?

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

leora April 1 2005, 11:12:41 UTC
The real problem is that "backdating" serves two unrelated purposes - making an entry not relevant for the timeline of your journal (whether you can post an entry with a particular date) and keeping it off friends lists. non-chronological is better than backdated, but will still run into problems with "backdated" entries that have perfectly normal, accurate dates.

I've yet to think of any good term for what the thing actually is, probably because there is no English word for a device that both affects the way the date is perceived, but not the date itself, and where an entry displays.

I'd be fine with a change, personally. But I expect this feature will always have a lot of user-ed issues because it's one of the least intuitive things on LiveJournal, and unlike the style systems, normal users run into the feature a lot.

Reply


imc April 1 2005, 10:07:58 UTC
"Entry is backdated or future dated" would be a minimal change from how it is at the moment (and it's no longer than "Entry is out of chronological order").

Reply

imc April 1 2005, 10:11:49 UTC
Oh, and making the text of that option a link to the relevant FAQ probably wouldn't hurt either.

Reply

kunzite1 April 1 2005, 10:15:43 UTC
or "back/future date entry"?

Reply


ex_deadmanta171 April 1 2005, 16:08:20 UTC
I really like the idea, but I don't know how many users will actually comprehend the meaning of "non-chronological" versus "backdated", but I have no suggestion for the title, so, yes, thumbs up!

Reply

prissi January 27 2007, 03:47:57 UTC
holy crap it's an alex

(uh, OT, yeah, this is totally a great idea, awesome that they're going to implement your suggestion ;)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up