Site Feedback

by

This page is where you can provide feedback relating to Fifteensquared or raise issues regarding the website itself.

Comments posted before 16/11/2023 can be found here.

New comments can be posted here.

If you need a more immediate response, please email:

96 comments on “Site Feedback”

  1. Kenmac
    I’ll leave you to decide – is Massimo’s comment @72 on the Guardian Philistine thread today inappropriate?

  2. I’d say it’s more of an attempt to show off rather than anything else. In the meantime I’ve unapproved it and we’ll see if Massimo comes back.

  4. @3 I think the title reflects the puzzle as it quotes two of the puzzles answers – as I think is par for the course for Cyclops blogs.

    Let’s see what the blogger has to say.

  5. Tony S makes a fair point…I did have some misgivings this morning, but I was out Xmas shopping all day and it slipped my mind…duly changed…

  6. Thanks mc_rapper67. I’m no fan of the populist in question but I’d like to see Fifteensquared remain an oasis of decorum in an increasingly crude world.

  10. paul @9

    The Guardian blogs are set to appear after the published closing dates for entries. This is usually one week.

    Sometimes, and I expect this will be the case for December 23rd’s puzzle, the deadline is more than one week and the blog publication date will be adjusted accordingly.

  11. The Azed blog has gone, I suspect this is due to the corrected entry date in The Observer .
    Can we have it back intact when the date allows please ? I would like to see all the comments from other people.

  12. @11

    Rest assured it will be back. The blogger was acting on the information he had. When he found out that the deadline was different, the blog was pulled. It’ll be back intact on January 8th, Hopefully all comments will be restored but if they’re not, I can sledgehammer them back in.

  13. Admin @12: Thanks for that. I fully support the decision you have taken. It is worth reminding ourselves sometimes how much we depend on the good will of the newspapers in which the crosswords are published and we should be very wary of doing anything which risks losing that.

  16. Great to see that you’ve introduced a facility to edit comments after submission. Much longed-for by many, I’m sure.

    (Ironically, I had to come back and edit a typo in this very comment! Twice!)

  18. Admin@17 I haven’t been commenting recently, but this sounds like a great idea.

    Also good that it has a cut-off time.

    Thank you.

  21. We have a blog duplication in today’s Guardian Cryptic 29,281 by Jack. The first by PeterO has comments now closed and no comments available in loonapick’s subsequent.

  29. Here’s an incredibly minor thing, but I thought I’d mention it. I’m going through some old Guardian Prize puzzles, and I couldn’t find the blog for 28,967. It turns out that it’s mislabeled 29,967 (see here).

    Maybe nobody after me will ever look for it again, but just in case someone does I thought I’d let you know. (I suppose that when we get to the actual 29,967 in a few years, that could also present an issue.)

    This site is great, and I’m sure lots of unsung work goes into keeping it so. Thanks!

  31. Ted @30

    Indeed. It has gone. Thanks Ted and everyone else for your vigilance as I’ll never be able to read all comments.

  32. We seem to have lost the ability to format in italics or bold, or to insert a link. Also the Save function isn’t working and the time keeps on ticking over.

  34. Testing – does the Edit Comment option work on a phone? A commenter has said he can’t see it.
    Yes, apparently it does on my Android. Can anyone confirm it works on an iPhone?

  37. This comment is posted from Safari on iPhone…

    …where “Click to Edit” with a timer appears right under my post. So, it’s a Firefox (on iPhone?) issue then.

  46. As my comment @23 on the blog for Everyman 4040 has not so far elicited a response, perhaps I should have raised it here instead as the point that concerns me is of general applicability. There used to be a rule here that preambles to blogs should absolutely not include any spoilers in relation to the puzzle concerned. I hope that this has not been dropped, as this sort of thing really can diminish the pleasure of solving a crossword for those people who have not yet attempted it (or are only partway through) and who are consulting this site to look at the blog for another puzzle.

  47. Rudolf @46

    You’re right and the majority of the time it is adhered to but occasionally mistakes creep in. I’ve modified it now.

    Apologies on behalf of everyone involved.

  49. Sorry kenmac, here is probably a better place to flag the new Quick Cryptic in the Guardian, number 1 today. It’s an 11 x 11 grid with explanations.

    I’m not set up for this for today but I’d be willing to blog this if you need another body.

  50. I fear that spoilers are again visible today in a preamble – see the blog for the Private Eye Cyclops puzzle 775.

  51. I am a CYCLOPS regular and the blog is quire delayed because it is a prize, I would be surprised if the “Headline” spoiled things for anybody. I think it is a nice tradition and I would like to see it continue.

  52. Sorry to be taking up space here again, but there doesn’t seem to be anywhere else to ask if a blog is planned for FT 17,694, which was published on 30th March.

  53. Re questions and comments about moderated/deleted comments throwing out the numbering attached to later comments referring back to previous posts:
    As one guilty of posting comments requiring moderation (I’m learning what not to do thanks to Ken Mac’s gentle responses), and also of requesting a comment to be deleted, I’d like to post poc’s question@40 on the blog for Jack, Guardian, 11 April, following comments @26, 30, and 33.

    paddymelon@33 (or is it?): the problem could be avoided by substituting a dummy entry (e.g. “comment removed/deleted/moderated”) for deleted comments in order to preserve the enumeration.

    Is this possible?

  54. Possible: yes
    Practical: not really

    Approving/Deleting a comment is easy with a single mouse click.

    Anything else involves editing and/or reposting, which would be too tricky to do on a day-to-day basis.

  55. This may sort itself out, Ken, but I just posted three times on the Fed blog and each time it refreshed the page, going back to the top (which is unusual) and my comment did not appear. So you will either get three in a row or nothing. Another glitch to sort out it seems.
    ================
    Update a minute later – just went back to PeterO’s blog from this page to find – yes – three in a row. So I deleted the unnecessary two follow ups. However, deffo not normal behaviour from the site.

  57. Thanks Ken. As per our online exchange, it looks to be sorted. I just commented, successfully, on the G page again.

  58. Guardian Cryptic 29,355 by Fed
    Comment 65
    Not in keeping with site policy 2. Any criticism of a puzzle or clue must be valid, constructive and presented in a polite manner. The reason for any dissatisfaction should be clearly indicated. Comments that do not comply with these criteria may be removed.

  62. FrankieG @59-61

    I see that you’ve been testing links, as requested.

    As I think you’ve discovered, the problem you’ve been experiencing is that you had coded multiple occurrences of “http” in your links. My guess is that, based on other WordPress behaviours, the routines responsible only look for more than two occurrences of “http” within any reply and, if found, mark the comment for approval.

    Actually, on reflection, I think it’s maybe more sophisticated than that as my reply with a third “http” wasn’t rejected but either way, I think that between us we’ve worked it out.

  63. Will try to post here. 9.45pm UK time Tues 16 April. fifteensquared currently offline and only a ”snapshot” older page available? Any one else finding that or can suggest ways around it, apart from applying the tried and true cryptic crossword approach of wait a bit and it will come to you.

  67. Posted this in the GD section a few days ago but I think it belongs here.

    I have one suggestion for those who blog Quiptic puzzles:
    These blogs need to be more detailed (explanatory) than those for regular cryptic puzzles so that beginners/relative beginners understand how the different elements of each solution are derived from the respective clues.
    This is not meant to be a criticism.

    I continue to be in awe of the immense voluntary service that each blogger is doing to the crossword society. Thank you bloggers!

  68. KVa @67

    Thanks for the feedback. I’ve thought about this over the past few days and I’ve discussed it with those that blog the Quiptic.

    In my opinion, the bloggers have to keep a balance between giving the solution as they see it and providing further explanation when they feel it is warranted. All this while not wishing to insult anyone’s intelligence.

    Of course, what’s obvious to Miss A will not always be obvious to Mr B (and vice versa). Thus, for example, if Mrs C leaves a comment stating, “I didn’t quite understand why SEE means CITY in 17 down”, it’s up to the blogger to respond with some clarification. Or, as often happens, Mr D comes in with another comment explaining the connection and will often refer Mrs C to the Chambers dictionary.

    The new Guardian Quick Cryptic, on the other hand, is fully intended for new solvers. It’s an 11×11 grid, which, of course, means fewer clues and thus fewer explanations. There have been three such puzzles (at the time of writing) and I think our newest blogger is doing a great job of balancing the explanations.

    That’s fair enough and that’s the beauty of this site. We are very welcoming to new solvers and, to a greater or lesser extent, we remember the days that cryptic crosswords were shrouded in mystery.

    What we don’t really need from people who comment on our blogs are lengthy explanations of clues that have been explained quite well in the original blog and that’s what I fear may be happening on this Quiptic blog: https://www.fifteensquared.net/2024/04/14/guardian-quiptic-1273-carpathian/. And, don’t forget, the bloggers receive a notification for all comments so they are given the chance to respond.

    To echo your words, this is not meant to be a criticism.

    I’ve been admin for this site for nearly two years now and in that time I’ve taken on a few new bloggers and if you want to be considered for a blogging post then take a look here: https://www.fifteensquared.net/about-2/

  69. Hi Ken. Just a minor observation. On the homepage, where the blogs are listed, there’s a total of the number of comments for each one. I’ve noticed that the counts for yesterday’s Quiptic and Everyman are wrong. As I say, not important, but it could be an indication of something else about to go wrong. Ta muchly.

  70. Hi Ken. Something weird’s going on/has been going on with names and emails from other posters. Please see the blog for Vulcan today. And on the home page it’s not showing up the number of posters so far.

  71. Indeed. Just adding another shout out to pdm’s above. Most peculiar. I was presented with KVa’s details this morning. No enormous harm done – we are all grown ups and I am sure will behave responsibly but it is a bit of a security breach.

  72. Jeez!

    I am SO SORRY.

    I’ve been experimenting with website caching plugins and, of course, when I test, things seem OK.

    I have disabled the culprit plugin.

  75. Current Azed blog@12 has what I think is an advert , but even worse some very poor grammar that needs correcting.
    Everyman@39 is the same.

  79. @74-78

    Thanks everyone. I really appreciate your vigilance.

    Akismet does a really good job of detecting spam but obviously the spammers are constantly trying to stay one step ahead.

  81. Hi Ken
    I wasn’t sure if this was just me but I see from the G thread that others too are experiencing a very sluggish site this morning. Refresh and/or post are taking quite a long time to register, compared with normal. I’m not experiencing this with anything else on the web so it seems to be 225-specific.
    ATB
    PM

  82. @81

    Nothing’s changed. It’s probably some problem with the hosting company.

    Let’s see how it goes over the next few days.

    Edit: this comment seemed to beat the land speed record. I got to edit after only three seconds

  83. I’m afraid there are a couple of comments to remove on today’s blog for the Picaroon Guardian Prize puzzle – 8 & 18, both ostensibly about Friday’s puzzle. In fact I think the commenter @8 has made a mistake about which puzzle he’s spoiling, which fortunately makes it a bit less of a spoiler. Someone has already pointed this out on the prize blog but I don’t know if you’d see it there.

  84. Admin@68
    I made a request but failed to see this section for a couple of weeks. Sorry. Wrong on my part.

    Your decision is final. So no further arguments on whether a Quiptic blog should be more elaborate or not.

    To echo your words, this is not meant to be a criticism.
    Why can’t I be criticised when I criticise others? If my criticisms are not constructive, that
    should be pointed out by others. I will certainly improve my posts keeping their feedback
    in mind.

    The link in your post gives me a clear message and is well noted.
    Though I politely disagree with your observation, I will not argue.

    Blogger’s post: Thanks for your kind offer. I am not sure yet.

    As a package, this site is a bundle of joy. Thanks for the exceptional service day after day after day.

  85. Hallo Ken
    Please note that Picaroon Prize 28,967 (14 Jan ’23) is misnumbered here as 29,967. I couldn’t find it myself but received kindly help from one of yesterday’s Guardian thread commenters!
    William
    (possibly the first William here, but chose to qualify my name as I thought claiming the isolated first (Christian?/!) name might be presumptuous! I must admit I cringed slightly when a recent arrival simply announced himself as “paul”, though I imagine the great Mr Halpern thinks nothing of it!)

  87. I wrote a comment on today’s Anto in the Guardian but when I submitted it, nothing happened. I’ve tried refreshing the page, opening a new page and copying and pasting. There have been no posts since PeterO@59 and hour or so ago, but that’s not unusual.

    I hope it’s not personal!

    Ha ha! I’ve just gone back and changed “w t f” to “hey ho” and successfully posted.

  89. Yes, it’s there now but only after I deleted “w_t_f”. If there is a policy about substitutes for rude words, it would be helpful if there was a message suggesting a change be made to something that might be seen to be less offensive or controversial, rather than just a blank.

    I don’t want to fill the site with expletives, but if some terms are not acceptable, it would be good to be informed. Just failing to post the contents seems a bit odd.

    It’s not just gremlins. (I can’t even post on this thread the original three-letter combination that caused the offence!)

  90. Perhaps the site has an age limit and the filter thing thinks that anyone using these abbreviations is 12 years old ?

  91. Lots of sites have language filters – we used to collapse with laughter seeing what one bulletin board did to Cockneys and Cockburn port and some poor soul actually lived in Scunthorpe which didn’t get through unscathed either – because those strings of letters triggered alterations. I got very frustrated having all my search terms for things in Hackney blocked at one workplace, when I really was working with some kids in the London Borough of Hackney and trying to find some resources for them. In that case the blocker wasn’t allowing searches for hacking. In fact I had a long list that had to be approved for searches.

  92. I don’t mind the imposition of standards, but surely there’s got to be a better way of doing it than simply ignoring the poster?

    In the meantime, hopefully my inner 12 year old will grow up soon.

  93. @89

    There is, I believe, an unwritten rule that crosswords do not use what some people feel are unacceptable words. And I like to think this extends to Fifteensquared as well.

    I took over admin of this site about two years ago and there was an occasion when someone used a certain four-letter word beginning with “F” in a comment. I can’t remember off the top of my head where/when/who. At that point I decided that I would take advantage of WordPress’s ability to block comments that contain certain keywords. As part of the same discussion, as far as I remember, there was also an objection to WTF. So I blocked its use as well.

    WordPress policy seems to be to just chuck these comments in the bin and there’s not much I can do about that, currently.

    Maybe time to start using WTH instead.

    For anyone who is confused:
    https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/WTF
    https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/WTH

  94. Thanks Ken. I fully understand where you’re coming from. I’ll start using what the heck instead of what the flip!

    Seriously though, as I said @92, it would be good if the poster could receive a warning or a polite request to rephrase, rather than the post being simply ignored, as happened to me. If that’s not possible because of the platform, that’s a pity.

    Site policy says that “any comments containing offensive language, are not acceptable and will be removed”, but that’s not accurate, is it. Perhaps “any comments containing offensive language, will not be accepted“?

    I apologise if anyone has been offended by my including (or attempting to include) an abbreviation for a profanity. I’m afraid my use of language can be a bit uninhibited after a lifetime spent in pubs, casinos and betting shops, and I did not mean to upset anyone by my attempt at posting such.

  95. Admin @93. It is quite common for crosswords to include the abbreviation FA, for ‘eff all’ as it were. I don’t see the abbreviation of sheffield hatter as being any worse but appreciate how difficult an issue this is for a site manager.

  96. Some clues may fall into this category too.
    Private Eye (Cyclops / 773)
    “Boobs,” as the Viagra user said? (5,2)
    Just shared. I have no particular view on what words should be avoided.
    I know the word ‘effing’ gets through the filter! 🙂

Comments are closed.