Currently CI does not enable us to list paragraphs

.[ list] reference material to be indented [ /list]

.Nor does CI enable us to use bullets and numbers to separate our ideas.

.Instead, we must resort to our own creativity as Neil Obstat has done by inserting an inconspicuous/bothersome period before each new paragraph as I am doing here.

.Therefore, I am making several recommendation here.

.1. Can the use of numbers and bullets to enumerate points be added as a feature?

.2. Can spacing be allowed automatically between paragraphs.

.3. Can the list function be enabled here so we can indent paragraphs or quote a reference and have that reference indented without using the quote function.

.Thank you, Matthew, for creating this awesome forum. Your time and patience is greatly appreciated.

If you double space after a sentence by clicking "enter" twice it will create the next paragraph.

See, I didn't have to add a period.

Not sure about the bullets thingy.

God bless you!

I have recently discovered that CI seems to have AI involved.
Even though I have diligently placed that . immediately before each sentence (after double spacing), suddenly after having some success, I have found to my disappointment that there are no spaces between paragraphs.

So, I am going to start using N.O.'s suggestion to place a period in the space between the paragraphs.
Right now, I am trying your suggestion, MyrnaM, but in the past, those triple spaces were either truncated or left intact with odd spacing ... Russian roulette style. One never knows what to expect on this forum.

.
See what happened, MM? Two paragraphs were truncated, while only one was left intact. Ergo, triple spacing does not work either.
.
So, now I am back to N.O's suggestion.

If you double space after a sentence by clicking "enter" twice it will create the next paragraph.

See, I didn't have to add a period.

Not sure about the bullets thingy.

God bless you!

.
I suspect it has something to do with what OS you're using because I've asked about this before and they pretty much say it must be on my end.
.
Sometimes double return works, but usually it doesn't.
.
I got tired of going back and putting paragraph spaces in two, three or four times on each post.
.
Why bother when you can just throw in a period and be done with it?
.
As for the number list, you can do it yourself:
1)  There's number one
2)  There's number two
3)  And so on
.
When you want a blank line, just drop a decimal and when it doesn't matter, then don't.
.
I highly doubt you're going to get any new features around here.
..

Aren't we a bit spoiled?

Ah, Nadir, your prompt replies keep me from getting myself in trouble via replies of my own that would be significantly more, um, pointed than yours.

CathInfo members can accomplish everything for which they use--or want to use--the new CathInfo WYSIWYG word-processor, if they would use the default new BBcode editor that's pretty much the same as on the old CathInfo default BBcode editor [×].

Hasn't Matthew already written--more than once--that the Web-based WYSIWYG word-processor used on the Simple-Machines Forum that's the software platform for the new CathInfo was an extra-cost addition paid for by Matthew?

I assume that being an extra-cost addition, its source code is proprietary, i.e., not open source [‡].  So Matthew has no access to it for fixing alleged features that fail to work, or providing new features that CathInfo members would like to see & use.  It even had he such access, it might not be a sensible use of his time in the context of his other responsibilities.

That written, the proprietors of the extra-cost addition should have provided user-level docuмentation that could be post-&-pinned on CathInfo at no extra cost, describing how to use those features that work correctly, and identifying those others that don't.  Expect me to be quite unforgiving of objections from proprietary vendors on that issue: I thoro'ly understand the issue and its arguments, having had to produce such docuмentation myself (albeit not for a word-processor).

-------
Note ×: Except for the problematically permanent conversion of deliberately coded HTML entities into the corresponding Unicode bit-pattern by the new (i.e.: SMF) BBcode editor.  But that irritation does not limit what CathInfo members can accomplish when they use that editor to write either:
•  their postings, or
•  their replies (ahem!).

Note ‡: To restate the equation written by a venerated academic guru: Programs = Algorithms + Data Structures (Niklaus Wirth: 1976).

Ah, Nadir, your prompt replies keep me from getting myself in trouble via replies of my own that would be significantly more, um, pointed than yours.

CathInfo members can accomplish everything for which they use--or want to use--the new CathInfo WYSIWYG word-processor, if they would use the default new BBcode editor that's pretty much the same as on the old CathInfo default BBcode editor [×].

Hasn't Matthew already written--more than once--that the Web-based WYSIWYG word-processor used on the Simple-Machines Forum that's the software platform for the new CathInfo was an extra-cost addition paid for by Matthew?

I assume that being an extra-cost addition, its source code is proprietary, i.e., not open source [‡].  So Matthew has no access to it for fixing alleged features that fail to work, or providing new features that CathInfo members would like to see & use.  It even had he such access, it might not be a sensible use of his time in the context of his other responsibilities.

That written, the proprietors of the extra-cost addition should have provided user-level docuмentation that could be post-&-pinned on CathInfo at no extra cost, describing how to use those features that work correctly, and identifying those others that don't.  Expect me to be quite unforgiving of objections from proprietary vendors on that issue: I thoro'ly understand the issue and its arguments, having had to produce such docuмentation myself (albeit not for a word-processor).

-------
Note ×: Except for the problematically permanent conversion of deliberately coded HTML entities into the corresponding Unicode bit-pattern by the new (i.e.: SMF) BBcode editor.  But that irritation does not limit what CathInfo members can accomplish when they use that editor to write either:
•  their postings, or
•  their replies (ahem!).

Note ‡: To restate the equation written by a venerated academic guru: Programs = Algorithms + Data Structures (Niklaus Wirth: 1976).

How would one enable the bullets? Please remember that not all of us are IT people and/or programmers.

.
Number 8 works just fine when you insert a space:

8 )

Thus to be consistent, and checking the results:
.
1 )
2 )
3 )
4 )
5 )
6 )
7 )
8 )
9 )
10 )
11 )
12 )
13 ) ....
18 ) ...
28 ) ...

.
Eliminating that space
8)
18)
28)
38)
etc.

Now this is very interesting, because when I am typing the smilies show up, but when I click SUBMIT or SAVE, all the smilies disappear except for the 8 + )

Checking further

28) this is point #28 and it shows up as a smilie as I type but once I click SAVE, the smilie disappears.

Testing

8) 8)  :)