Add Comment
New Forum Wishlist - but read roadmap first
I have closed the original New forum Wishlist - and boiled it down (and added some stuff) to the things we will do, the things we might do, the things we are unlikely to do and the things we won't do. Here is our roadmap. There are no timescales as we have a lot of other stuff on our plate. El Reg forums roadmap - no time …
This topic was created by Drewc.
Re: Upvotes/downvotes
Who cares about "votes"? Seriously ... do "votes" have any real meaning?;
Re: Upvotes/downvotes
It's not like you can vote more than once without sockpuppetry involved.
M Gale,
I believe the votes aren't linked to your login, but a cookie. So you can vote on as many machines as you have access to. Perhaps someone should hire a botnet and see if they can give some unsuspecting commentard 100,000 upvotes. Or downvotes...
No Votes?
Given how easy it is to amass upvotes by getting in at the right time with a popular comment, or downvotes by just trolling, any measurement based on the two is really pretty meaningless.
What really brings home the value of anyone's contributions is the number of times they've been thoroughly ignored.
So, I really would like to see an easy way of seeing how many of my posts just sank witout a trace. Any chance of a 'Number of posts which bombed" total?
Re: No Votes?
Have an upvote. Oops! This post doesn't count now...
My impression is that the site is changing. The number of people bothering to vote is going up massively. I think I got well over 100 votes this week - out of a total of less than 2,000. Also, it used to be rare to see any post with more than 10 votes, and that's not the case any more.
Admittedly that may be partly because someone downvoted the first half page of my posts the other day. Oh dear... And also because I just commented favourably on a Windows Phone story, which is a reliable way of gaining me downvotes...
So maybe un-voted posts will be more special than voted ones soon?
I do like the idea of working with voting ratios though. If you haven't got more upvotes than downvotes, then maybe your ups shouldn't count so much. Not quite sure what the ratio should be between upvotes and no-votes though.
Re: No Votes?
Yep, things are changing. I broke 2000 upvotes one week when it seemed everything I posted got upvotes, and some quite significant (still puzzled by that).
I think without catering for novotes, any measure based on ratios (even if just for fun) is pretty meaningless.
It's only curiosity, really. It would only matter if the changes in the pipeline lead to any attempt to assess commentards based on vote statistics (other than the crude badges scheme we have now).
@IaS (was:"So maybe un-voted posts will be more special than voted ones soon?")
Nah. All votes are crap. This has been my stand right from the git-go ... anonymous "thumbs" are meaningless. Commentardary is what's important in user feed-back forums like we see on ElReg.
At least, look on the bright side, we have the ability to upvote and downvote. So posts people like can get lots of green, and posts taking the opposite position in the eternal Apple/Android war can see lots of red. As a statistic is isn't a particularly solid one, but it is better than the retarded "LIKE".
What we need, as has been suggested above, is a line that reads like:
Posts: 10240; Ups: 4321 (24%); Downs: 1234 (7%); Nothing: 9999 (95%).
The discrepancy between up/down counts and %ge is because it is showing the %ge of posts with one-or-more upvotes (etc) . This should be a better statistic than purely up vs down.
You know, I've seen some forums where a post gets too many downvotes, it is hidden behind a message that reads like "This post received too many downvotes, click here if you really want to read this rubbish". (^_^)
I agree with your suggested stats line. Seems just right.
On your last point - I'd like to see all, even those with massive downvotes. I like to see the comment thread in its entirety, even the posts that are panned by the commentards : a big negative reaction is often as informative as a favourable one.
Bottom line - I don't want to have to work to see all that's been said (so I would never use an 'Ignore' button, even if elReg offered me one).
Proposal to settle brand w*nkers..
You may have noticed a post where I threw a virtual brick at yet another "you mentioned make X and I'm a fan of make Y so I'm going to diss your choice for no other reason" poster. Apologies for blowing up, but it was getting irritating.
I would like to propose a novel solution to preserve the signal to noise ratio: a checklist.
If we could make a checklist with the major makes, say, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Linux, Facebook (etc, you get the idea) with an option to name a brand in full if it's not part of the list yet, a selection of products or "generic" and then the relevant denigrating statement (unsecure, cheap, buggy, monopolistic, flat out liers, privacy violators, FUD spreaders), you could generate a shortcode for such messages which someone could link to. So instead of responding to an OSX post with "Apple is for idiots" you'd end up with a reference "A6z" someone could look up if they were really bothered but otherwise ignore. You could possibly name the components in full if no selection existed yet, i.e. lada;unreliable;fool - with a bit of frequency analysis you can quickly spot new trends :).
It's the genesis of an idea, I'm sure the esteemed audience will find ways to substantially improve on this but it would cut out the repetitive (and frankly spectacularly boring) fanboi squawking, and possible corporate trolls (no idea if you have them, but given some posts I'm almost sure of it).
Opinions? Flames? Beer?
Re: Proposal to settle brand w*nkers..
You want to get right on that, Fred? Never mind ... I'll handle it.
All code sucks. All hardware sucks. All operating systems suck. All fanbois/grrls suck.
I think that pretty much covers it. Relax, have a homebrew :-)
Oh, gawd/ess ... (was: Re: Proposal to settle brand w*nkers..)
After reading TeeCee's "comment", I remembered why I tried to put a stop to this terrible idea in OneEasyPost[tm] ... Is anyone reading old enough to remember "geek code" as used in the wild on Usenet?
http://www.geekcode.com
Terrible idea overall (promotes "us v.s. them"), but reading the code might bring a chuckle or two to anyone over 40 who has been using computers for over 20 years. Safe for work, mostly, depending on where you work ;-)
Beer, because ... well, it's 18:10 here in California ...
Re: Proposal to settle brand w*nkers..
"it would cut out the repetitive (and frankly spectacularly boring) fanboi squawking, and possible corporate trolls "
But then you'd miss some absolute gems! Plenty of entertainment tucked in some of the fanboi ravings......
Re: Proposal to settle brand w*nkers..
But then you'd miss some absolute gems! Plenty of entertainment tucked in some of the fanboi ravings......
Maybe that is what triggered my reaction - there is a declining quality there. I agree that some people would put some effort into those replies, and did so with impressive humour . However, it has descended into bickering of a level that even my 14 year old wouldn't lower himself to, and he's shown some real talent in that direction.
So, quality. Oh well. Maybe it'll just blow over. Or I'm getting old and cranky, but I can fix at least one of those conditions with a beer :).
SIlly idea
Not sure if it's already suggested, but that "send corrections" link at the bottom of the article might be better off pointing at a page where you can send corrections, rather than the generic "here's how to contact us" page. At least while logged in, anyway.
Sometimes I see an article that makes my inner proofreader want to curl up and cry a little. At the same time though, can I really be bothered firing up an email client just to tell someone they spelled "plant matter" as "plant madder"?
It's in the article on green Li-Ion batteries, by the way. You might want to check that. Or not.
Re: SIlly idea
Corrections link was disabled temporarily in response to possible security issue. Now restored.
Re: SIlly idea
My inner proofreader has died a long time ago, tortured to death by auto-correct and every other "auto-screwup" that now infests word processing kit, and that trains misspelled words into your muscle memory.
That's where the "teh" problem comes from..
BTW, in that context, thanks for the "edit" button. There are still some auto-correct gremlins infecting OSX that I haven't managed to kill off (the OS has it, the browser has it - it's a game of whack-a-mole to kill it all) so I get last minute "corrections" thrown at me which aren't. With edit mode I can at least try to clean it after the evil deed of posting :).
Hiding Replies
One thing I have noticed is how replies to the first post can result in the second post being shoved further down the page or sometimes even onto page 2.
Given that most of these long reply chains are of little real value and just offer entertainment as either a troll gets lambasted or a couple of commentards slug it out, could all replies except the first 3 or 4 be hidden unless requested.
There is an example of it in action here:
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1595915_census-2011-manchester-revealed-as-capital-of-single-people-with-no-religious-faith#comments
Private Reg front page
As first suggested in here.
Though for BOFH's sake, make it an option and not mandatory.
Get rid of the 1990's badges, has someone stepped into a time machine, or has a nursery opened nearby? There must be some motivation for it? Can't logically see why!
Anonymous!!!
Why is the voting anonymous, it would be nice to know who exactly likes or dislikes your posts. Purely and simply to enable a conversation with that person for example if they like what you have said, they could either just agree with you or they are easily led and may be interested in joining your cult!! If someone dislikes your comment, they may not of understood the comment or they may just have a unique way of offering themselves up for ritual sacrifice!!
Also why post anonymously, I am in the RAF I have no problem posting under my real name if I believe the topic to be sensitive or could potentially get me into trouble I just dont post. However there are other options to the whole anonymous coward tag, assign a name to those that tick the "post anonymously" box just to make replies a bit easier.
Re: Anonymous!!!
"if I believe the topic to be sensitive or could potentially get me into trouble I just dont post"
In a way this would be like a form of censorship - people would feel unable to comment on anything they think could be controversial just in case there are repercussions. Silencing any criticism of things people believe to be wrong leads to a dark place I doubt any of us would like to go! Replies are OK at the moment, you just need to ensure you put "@AC date/time" to clarify which post you're replying to, just as identifiable as some system generated UID.
Regarding anonymous up/down votes, I think you may have led a sheltered internet life. There are some very sad people out there who take such things personally even to the stage of tracking people down IRL - this also relates to my point above about why some posters prefer to make anonymous comments.
Re: Anonymous!!!
Thanks for taking the time to answer. I can see your point with regards to teh censorship angle, to be honest hadnt really looked at it from that way. I hadn't looked at it from that point because as I said in my original message I either post or I dont and if I do post I stand by what I say and would back it up in the flesh just as I would online. (maybe I'm odd??? Hmmmmm!)
A lot of the time it can get annoying when you are replying to an AC@ (whatever time) or even reading someone elses reply to an AC as you then have to search through user names and times they posted. Is there anyway that when the user checks the "Post Anonymously" box a system name could be given to them, this could be a random name that is not connected in any shape form or way to the name they registered to the site with. Like bob, or dave something random lol. Purely and simply to make it easy to refer too
As for the idiots that track people down IRL then there is a place for them too, it has padded walls and they feed you 3 times a day whilst letting you wear a lovely jacket that fastens at the back!!
Order posts by postdate
As alluded to by AceRimmer above, the current pseudo-threaded system breaks down into a confused mess pretty quickly, once everyone starts hitting "Reply" to other posts. This makes it especially confusing when you revisit a previously read topic to catch up on the latest commentardery. Rather than all new posts being at the end, they are jumbled up and scattered throughout the thread, depending on where a particular commentard was when they hit the reply button. So you have to re-read the whole thread all over again, picking out the new stuff.
Just asking generally —Is there any particular reason so much of the functionality on El Reg [login cookies, voting system, viewing own threads, notifications, formatting, threading... etc. etc] is so completey shitely implemented? Seems to me you're on some kind of "We roll our own" ego trip. All well and good if your own was in any way half decent but, seeing as it's not, maybe you should just swallow your pride and implement some off-the-shelf stuff that actually works in a user-friendly fashion.
Re: Order posts by postdate
and is preferably tapatalk compatible
Re: Order posts by postdate
madra,
Sorry to state the bleedin' obvious, but there is a drop-down menu at the top right of any forum page, which allows you to sort posts by newest, oldest or thread order. Although I think it disappears unless you're logged in. So when I come back to a forum I use that to see only the newest posts, unless there have been lots - when it often makes more sense to go through in order, so you can see what people have replied to.
On your main point though, I agree with you. These forums really aren't very user friendly. The semi-threaded thing really doesn't work, although I do prefer it to just having posts in date order, as when there aren't too many replies it makes more sense.
While I'm posting, I do have another gripe. There's the swirly arrow thing on the left of a post to tell you it's a reply. Normally clicking on this takes you back to the post it's a reply to. However, if you're in the newest or oldest thread order, it takes you to the post it's a reply to - but now you've lost the post you clicked on - because they're not being shown in order. I guess if you are going to implement this, then when you click the arrow, it probably needs to re-order back into thread order - so that you can look at the OP and replies in order.
Re: Order posts by postdate
Soorry. I didn't make myself clear. I was talking about the ordering of comments on articles, not threads on the forum.
Just a couple of thoughts:
Most forum threads seem to be almost dead when you compare the activity in them to those directly associated with articles. Perhaps it would be possible to have links to threads on the forums on the homepage as well as featured articles to encourage people to use them more? If anything else it might make more people interested in posting within threads they may not even be aware exist.
Also it's not always entirely clear what a reply is actually replying to. Would it be possible to add a 'in reply to post xxx posted by yyy' or something to that effect together with a link in the header of each reply?
Forum threading
Vimes said: "Also it's not always entirely clear what a reply is actually replying to. Would it be possible to add a 'in reply to post xxx posted by yyy' or something to that effect together with a link in the header of each reply?"
Herein lies an issue: There were a number of posts I could have quoted here, and would have liked to have done. But without getting out notepad or something, I can't.
Personally I think the whole thing should be properly threaded, with an ability to expand or contract each individual branch of the conversation "tree". And I think a proper quote (and multiquote) system would be a big benefit.
The fact that I can't quote more than one person at a time - and they way the system works I can't even see the other posts in order to cut-and-paste and do some kind of pseudo quoting - does I suggest lead to the kind of topics where no-one knows who's replying to whom.
I also think there's probably more than a few commentards who Reply to one of the first posts rather than post their own new comment simply in order to get their comment on the first page. A proper collapsible threaded system would help alleviate that.
"Notifications when someone directly replies to your post or to the thread. Via email or forum in-box? And what if there are dozens of responses to the thread?"
How about a graphic (or a number) to denote replies to a post/thread in the "My Posts" view? That'll give a quick HUD display of which comments are turning into conversations without spamming. You could use a + to denote that "this comment has replies" or a number to denote the number of replies (which would be more useful).
fixed-width pages?
Is there a good reason why El Reg pages are fixed-width HTML?
My complaint is that it's only using half of my monitor's screen. And it scales horribly if I attempt to make the fonts larger.
I know, from personal experience, that creating HTML that fills the entire screen and gracefully scales takes a little more effort.
Just curious. Lots of other sites do the same thing. I'm sure I've read the W3C recommends that one should not make assumptions about target screen resolutions. Yup, graphics will look smaller but I went for a hires monitor so fonts can be scaled larger and still be crisp.
Re: fixed-width pages?
Most big websites are fixed width, although there does seem a recent trend to return to fluid width.
The original impetus for fixed width was to get more control over design and layout. Of course since then, screen formats have proliferated - and the design control that fixed width is largely illusory.
