Bug Reporting Thread

Reporting this briefly here for completeness.I have been contacted by a user who is unable to login. It seems that his member info is messed up.Full details in the Private Administrators Forum (to protect the privacy of the person concerned).

On second thoughts, I won't report the indicated problem in PAF. That's because PAF has disappeared into thin air.For details, without the name:I shall call the user "xxx". When I look up "xxx", it shows that name as an alias. When I check the profile, it says:The user ID nnnn does not exist.where nnnn is the actual user number.Looking up under Board Central also says that the user does not exist.His email indicated that he has created another account. He is having difficulty logging into that. I suspect the problem in this case is in his browser, rather than at the site. I was able to login as this alternate member.Incidently, the profile information no longer has a visible password. So how does an administrator help a person who is having password problems, and can't get mail from the site that tells him the password. (Note, this is a hypothetical, since it isn't the problem in this particular case).

It's back. Thanks for pointing that out. Percy probably just fixed it.Maybe your link would have worked even if the forum was not showing up
in the display. But it is now back to showing up.

This was discoved by CK and jazzns in Message 79 and following. I am reporting it here so it does not get lost.There is a discrepancy between the rules as linked to from forum pages and the rules linked from the main page. In particular, the numbering is inconsistent.

---

I am not seeing that problem when I use "Preview", either on a new post or on an edit of an existing post.I haven't tried an actual post, since I don't have anything I particularly want to say in that thread.Hmm, I have seen that error message before. As I recall, it was due to use of a dBcode [thread=nn] so that the thread reference was relative to the forum. I was editing a message to fix a link. The thread had been moved from a different forum. The dBcode had expanded correctly, relative to the original forum, but on editing wanted to reinterpret it according to the current forum.

---