I see I can delete posts from my wall now without having to report anyone. Thank you for this improvement!
Yes, this was pushed to production some time today. Hope you (and others) enjoy 
Alex,
This is wonderful!
Thanks to all of you!
Thanks for all the improvements!
Lingqs enjoy more and more! with all this improvements!
My favorites are:the quick import( import bookmarklet) from the Internet and the Quick Lingqs.
I shall now have to go and post myself an obnoxious message which I can then delete! Thank you.
Oh, no. That was already possible. Oh, well. Some other time! Great feature, though!
Yes, it’s nice.
But what really annoys me (yesterday, today and maybe longer - who knows?), that I have so many problems with the other still unresolved issues. See http://bit.ly/fic05K . It’s the first time now that I am not able to use LingQ as I would like to 
What wonders me most, is, that there are no complaints from other users. Am I the only one? Or is it due to the fact that French has so many items with an apostrophe in it?
Hape you are not helping by constantly posting your complaints. The present spate of problems resulted in large part from our effort to fix your problem with LingQing words with apostrophes. Mark has explained the process of indexing that is required to implement the new fix, and this process is not yet complete as I understand it. There were unanticipated problems for which we apologize.
a little patience qould be appreciated.
I like this improvement too.
@Hape: No Hape, these problems annoy me too. I often wonder why LingQ’s updates cause so many problems regularly. I often wondered about the quality control mechanism. I complained a lot in the past, and I offered my help in testing before the new versions are uploaded, but I was told that this is not possible.
Once or twice in six months it is impossible to use LingQ because major updates cause major problems. Now I’m used to it. This doesn’t mean that I like it 
There are still some problems that I mentioned in august last year! I think improvements are great, maybe necessary to attract new learners, but I think bugs should be fixed. Only fans tolerate bugs. Other people will leave before they get knowledge of the great benefit of LingQ. And as far as I can see only a few users are able to understand the full functionality of LingQ. They want to make LingQ easier to use. But each new function makes that it seems more complicated then it is for new users.
At the moment I don’t dare to complain because I read something like “The Germans are too correct, too perfect” on the forum. Other times my suggestions were neglected, and after complaining again and doing a lot of additional and time consuming research the support admits that I’m right.
I worked in the IT business for more than 30 years, and I am a perfectionist testing IT systems very rigorously before releasing them to the public.
My expectations seem to be too high in the days of the internet.
Sorry for posting too much in the past.
The recent problems resulted from our attempt to fix bugs that bothered only a small number of users, those lingQing words with apostrophes, and those with massive numbers of saved LingQs. We felt we had to fix these.
Most recent innovations, bookmarklet, qicklingqs etc have been well received.
We have limited resources and cannot implement a full fledged QA system. one day, if LingQ grows we hope to have the resources to do so. Meanwhile we will continue to favour development and improvement and accept occasional problems. We will nevertheless look into the procedures that caused these latest temporary problems to try to reduce such problems.
@hape,vera - we recognize that there are issues at the moment and we are working to fix them. We do appreciate when issues are reported even if we are unable to respond immediately. Often fixes take time and often problems don’t materialize in our testing but do appear when our users start using the system. We simply do not have the resources to test as thoroughly as one might if one is producing desktop software which ships on a cd. Nor do we have the resources of a google to test although in both of these examples bugs do still appear.
At any rate we are always trying to do what’s best for LingQ which is what you are after too. As hape implies, the web environment is a different one.
@ hape: the apostrophe bug-let has never bothered me. If I can’t LingQ a word properly in its current form, I know I’ll come across it somewhere else and so I don’t worry about it at all. I don’t have your and Vera’s professional background and so can perhaps live easier with upheaval. If I notice something odd, I report it and sit back in the knowledge that it’ll be dealt with eventually. I am actually sometimes quite surprised to see and appreciate an improvement where I hadn’t even seen a problem.
@ Vera: I remember that remark about our national character and still think it was very stupid remark, totally uncalled for. I am sure that in the long run your and hape’s observations will be very beneficial for all of us.
@ SteveMarkAlex: It’s just because we love LingQ so much that we want it to be perfect!
If I would have designed LingQ (or would have been asked) - I would have interpreted the apostrophes like a space, comma, … - as a word delimiter.
I very often ask myself: What was the reason to design it that way?
s’… = se …
j’… = je …
m’… = me …
l’… = le/la …
d’… = de …
It would have made everything much easier in French.
LingQ has to work for all languages. We can’t ignore English, wouldn’ t you agree?
LingQ has to work for all languages. We can’t ignore English, wouldn’ t you agree?
OK, I understand.
But it would have been possible to define a list of word delimiters per language…
One day we will find the time to optimize the system for specific languages.
Thank you for the introduction of the long-awaited deleting function!