Sorry for not specifying, and thanks for the bug reporting tip!
In this comment, there are multiple spoiler blocks that reveal successively. (first one, then first and second, then …) and only when you hover directly over the block. In this article, it’s all of them whenever you hover over the article.
That’s right; on LessWrong, spoilers in comments are implemented very differently from spoilers in posts. (I don’t know why that’s so; perhaps someone from the LW team can comment on this.)
Was definitely intentional, though I think mostly for relatively bad reasons that I should get around to fixing. I could explain, but I think the original intention was mostly just wrong, so let’s treat it as a bug for now.
Working fine here (both on Less Wrong and GreaterWrong). What is your browser/version/platform?
This has happened to myself too(just like how yoav ravid explained it). Both on Chrome and Mozilla.
I thought I might have just implemented them incorrectly, but if you see it correctly, then I don’t know.
I messaged the moderators yesterday about it.
What versions of Chrome and Firefox? What platform?
Folks, saying “Chrome” or “Firefox”, with no additional information, is not helpful! When reporting website problems, always specify all of:
Browser
Browser version
Operating system (and version)
Type of device (smartphone? tablet? laptop? etc.)
EDIT: However in this case it seems to be intentional design, not a browser bug—see my other comment.
Sorry for not specifying, and thanks for the bug reporting tip!
In this comment, there are multiple spoiler blocks that reveal successively. (first one, then first and second, then …) and only when you hover directly over the block. In this article, it’s all of them whenever you hover over the article.
That’s right; on LessWrong, spoilers in comments are implemented very differently from spoilers in posts. (I don’t know why that’s so; perhaps someone from the LW team can comment on this.)
Was definitely intentional, though I think mostly for relatively bad reasons that I should get around to fixing. I could explain, but I think the original intention was mostly just wrong, so let’s treat it as a bug for now.