The discrepancy has to be the number of posts you bring up with each page. Mine is set with 30 posts per page.My last page number on your excellent thread in 197.
The discrepancy has to be the number of posts you bring up with each page. Mine is set with 30 posts per page.My last page number on your excellent thread in 197.
That makes sense, though I’ve never set it i must have the default setting.The discrepancy has to be the number of posts you bring up with each page. Mine is set with 30 posts per page.
Thanks! I’ve been noticing for some time that Crawdaddy’s in-forum links never go where they are supposed to. Now I know how to compensate: copy the link and remove the page number!It's the way the link to that post was copied.
If you go to the post and copy the *URL* you'll get both a page number and post number. The page number is quite relative and based on how many posts-per-page you have set on your profile. So... Robert has a quite large post-per-page as *his* URL is page 132. For me, that post he links is on page 197. The link as he presented it will take you to page 132 and *ignore* the post number as it's not on that page *unless* your posts-per-page count matches Robert's.
The *correct* way to post a link to a specific post is to copy the URL under the post number (on the far right of the top bar of a post) - the one Robert linked is *currently* #3,993 of 3,937 (the last number changes every time a new post is added to the thread). When you copy the link on those numbers you have:
You can also get the same thing by *removing* the page number information from the original link (which is what Robert sees on the URL bar when *he* goes to that post):
So for the link above, you'd remove the "page-132#" part leaving the "post-4927223" directly after the last "/" of the URL. That, too, would return the same URL as if you copy the one under the post # link.