Nodes related to this one:

It's been a long day, and decided to have a little fun with this most recent edev bug report.

There are three bugs here.
  • If you submit a writeup with the writeuptype or writeuptype-definition, instead of writeuptype-idea, or what not, you can create a definition. This is bad in the case of people who are noding for numbers, as it shields the nodes from downvotes.
  • You can also change an existing writeup to be of "type" any node title in the database, not only definition, but many other things. As you can see in the definition maker, I've give you items of the five base types, null, nate, and jessicapierce, just because I was feeling goofy.
  • This also addresses the complaints of how definitions don't seem to "stick" for content editors. I have a hard time getting a writeuptype of type definition to stick to a node first try. However, if I set the node to null, go back, set it to definition, then it sticks if I click on the individual node again. This could be a useful tool for CE's as they try to work around this issue.


This isn't a priority one bug, and it's not the worst thing in the world, but the results can be mildly amusing (especially if you are up late writing an edev bug submission).

The nodes roughly speak for themselves as to what it can do. Problems here is that it also messes with some of the stats tickers to have jessicapierce and nate type nodes in the database.

Comments are always welcome.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.