If you were in charge of this community, what would you want to see added to Onesite's tools and functions? (We're talking here about these forums plus the blogs, groups, and wikis, but not the D&D Character Builder, Compendium, or Adventure Tools. Those are completely separate from Onesite.)
Steve
Otherwise, a dice roller might be good. Something built in that prevents cheating, but can be accessed when you're making your post. Would be great for PbP.
It would also be really nice if the RPG Gamer Classifieds and some of the groups focusing on Encounters/PbP would be linked from here. Though, I think that's not Onesite's responsibility.
Being able to see a list of a user's posts somewhere in their profile, including my own. Sometimes my replies get buried when a thread takes off, and it'd be nice to have a way to find my own posts. It's also useful to be able to find posts of other users, as well.
Being able to see a list of a user's posts somewhere in their profile, including my own. Sometimes my replies get buried when a thread takes off, and it'd be nice to have a way to find my own posts. It's also useful to be able to find posts of other users, as well.
Doesn't the profile already do this (mine does); or are you saying that it doesn't track enough posts? As for other people's posts, it depends on their privacy settings.
- Like button
- I want a Like button for individual posts. NOT a Like link to Facebook. Just an internal +1 like feature so that I can let a poster know I like his comment without taking up an entire post to say so.
- Custom organization
- I visit a few specific forums. I would like to sort the forum tree to suit my own tastes.
- Real "block"
- I would prefer to not see anything by posters on my block list. Ever. Not to see that they posted. Not to see that someone else quoted them. Not ever. (I assume that folks who have me on their block list would prefer not to see evidence of my posts, either.)
- I suspect an added benefit of this feature would be a dramatic reduction in the number of "Report this post" use and thread closings. I know that certain posters set off my trigger points, and I assume I set off those of others. If we can't see each other, we don't bait or flame each other nearly as much.
- Better Blog integration. What's the difference between a Blog post and a Forum post exactly? To me they look the same. Let people label an opening post as "Blog" and then it just gets added to both the forums and the user's Blog at the same time (optionally). That also gives Blogs more vision (I always forget they even exist. Do people really read them, when they're not sent there by a link?) and makes it easier for people to start one.
- Make Groups easier to reach. Currently you need to do "Groups" -> "My groups" and then pick the group you want. Why not just put a dropdown at the main "Groups" on every page where you can immediately jump to your groups? Why not even just add the Group forums to the rest of the forums on the main overview?
- Disabling forums. You can currently disable entire groupings, but not remove a single forum you're not interested in from the list.
Uhm... that's it for now. I can probably come up with more in time.
Also, Timmeh's suggestion of links to the gamer classifieds is a good one. They are pretty well hidden from anyone that doesn't already know where to look and the other forums (community, 4e general, what's a DM/Player to do, sometimes even the OTT) keep getting game requests because people don't know where to look.
And I heartily second Mand12's mention of the search engine. It is just about useless. I've had the exact same problems that he described.
For Seeker, I like his non-facebook "like" or "+1" button idea (and I would add the request that you be able to see who liked it, otherwise it halfway defeats the purpose) and the custom reorganization. I don't know much about the block feature since I rarely use it but it doesn't sound like it can hurt.
- Real "block"
- I would prefer to not see anything by posters on my block list. Ever. Not to see that they posted. Not to see that someone else quoted them. Not ever. (I assume that folks who have me on their block list would prefer not to see evidence of my posts, either.)
- I suspect an added benefit of this feature would be a dramatic reduction in the number of "Report this post" use and thread closings. I know that certain posters set off my trigger points, and I assume I set off those of others. If we can't see each other, we don't bait or flame each other nearly as much.
This is actually a way some forums deal with handing out bans. Rather than a YOU ARE BANNED message that causes the user to attempt to circumvent it, they continue to allow postings from the banned user. They just don't let anyone else see them, at all. Eventually the poster in question wonders why nobody ever responds to him and leaves.
I do find it somewhat irritating to have to see the posts of people on my block list, and especially ones who have obnoxiously large signatures (which aren't filtered at all).
- Smart topics. None of this "pick a category, then drop a post there" nonsense. You open a topic, you keyword it "DM, D&D4e, Strikers" and it gets dropped in all those categories at the same time, linked together. Categories stop existing as a thing and become filters on the topics, so that you can find topics where you'd expect them and reach all your audiences, not just the ones on the category you picked. Or worse, you have to make 3 topics and get 3 different discussions.
I really like that idea. It might prevent or at least lessen cases where there are a dozen different threads all about the exact same topic.
- Make Groups easier to reach. Currently you need to do "Groups" -> "My groups" and then pick the group you want. Why not just put a dropdown at the main "Groups" on every page where you can immediately jump to your groups? Why not even just add the Group forums to the rest of the forums on the main overview?
I love that idea. The process to go to a group isn't hard, but it certainly is longer than it needs to be. For that matter, how about a similar thing for forums in general. It's a little annoying that when I log in it always takes me to one page, then I have to go to forums, then I have to go to D&D forums. Maybe have a favorites list that we can add groups and forums to. And be able to set "homepage" preferences so that when we log in we go straight to a forum or group of our choice.
- Disabling forums. You can currently disable entire groupings, but not remove a single forum you're not interested in from the list.
Definitely this.
A Boolean search function would be fantastic.
A "like" button for individual posts (but not a dislike button!), something like what Erfworld has.
And everything I already said in the Is It Time for a Forum Reorganzation? thread.
Also, it would be great if we could reinstitute Custom Titles for winners of the Expert DM Competitions.
More/better formatting for posts. The current formatting options get frustrating.
Longer word count for posts would be nice as well, since with charop guides it is easier than you would think to run out of space in a post.
Better search function.
Otherwise, a dice roller might be good. Something built in that prevents cheating, but can be accessed when you're making your post. Would be great for PbP.
I would like to second a dice roller.
Number one request: a better search engine; even if it's just google integration or something. The current seach is dire.
I'm pressing the button but nothing is happening!!!
+1
- The ability to order the forums nd make groups the way that I want. For example, the forums I rgularly check are the DDI forums, then Community Business, then D&D General. So I would like to be able to make a group of those forums at the top of the forum listing for me. Failing that, a way to place the "family" of forums that I want to read first at the top.
- The ability to place an RSS feed/subscription to a given forum (for forum titles) or thread(for posts). Either an indication that a new post/thread has been added (minimum) or the titles/content of each new thread/each new post that has been added since last I checked.
- The ability to +1 posts, combined with the ability for a poster to set a minimum threshold below which they do not want to see the posts. Note, and this is important, this is not a desire to see a corresponding -1 button, as that simply invites trolling and malicious downvoting of posts.
If you do it, it would probably also be nice to be able to get one aggregate e-mail each day for all blogs one follows as well. I don't bother with bloggers on this site either, for much the same reason as above. It's sad, because I'm sure there's a lot I'm missing, but with limited time each morning to check up on activity, forum/blog surfing really isn't reasonable.
I guess +1 could be ok if -1 do not exist. No need for more negativity here.
Full and complete agreement with that one!
+1!
#1: Get rid of the "Most Viewed Topics".
#2: Put in "Featured Topics". Things like this topic, the discussions in GD about the latest article (RoT, LoL, etc.), or just topics that a VCL/WoTC employee have seen and think are interesting would be good topics. They'd be a lot more helpful to the casual forumgoers like Aliothefool.
Feature suggestion 1: For moved threads to leave a redirect link like the old boards did. Currently if a thread is moved you have no idea where it went.
Feature suggestion 2: The ability for WotC employees to make global threads that will appears in every forum. This would be great for announcements so you do not have to post six versions of the same post each in a different board.
- A better search engine, including the ability to search for threads rather than individual posts.
- The ability to display forums in the order of our choice, or at least to hide all the sixty-billion subforums I never look at rather than having to scroll down past them all to get to the ones I am actually interested in.
- The ability to give posts a '+1' with an optional short message, just as on the ENworld forums.
- Some way to prevent inconsiderate people from rendering threads unreadable by posting images that are too wide. Images over a certain width should be auto-sblocked.
These two suggestions go together:
#1: Get rid of the "Most Viewed Topics".
#2: Put in "Featured Topics". Things like this topic, the discussions in GD about the latest article (RoT, LoL, etc.), or just topics that a VCL/WoTC employee have seen and think are interesting would be good topics. They'd be a lot more helpful to the casual forumgoers like Aliothefool.
I just want to start by saying I'm not trying to be argumentative, so I hope this doesn't sound that way.
That wouldn't be enough for me. I'm an avid forum user a couple of different places around the net. I am on Twitter all day, every day. I'm on my favorite football team's website every day. I also keep up with EN World via their e-mails once per day. I honestly don't consider myself a casual forumgoer.
I just don't come here anymore because it's more trouble than it's worth. And I wouldn't want to be told what someone else thought was important (not that that's a bad thing at all, but it's not what would rope me back in).
As with the other forums I frequent (that are all still using VBulletin) I would want an e-mail once each day telling me all new threads, then all updated threads, for each forum I subscribe to. My e-mail client is always open, but not my browser. Honestly, the only reason I came here for this conversation was because multiple people tweeted about it, so I clicked the link to come directly to the thread.
Again, I don't want to appear argumentative, so I hope it doesn't appear that way. I just wanted to clarify that it's something specific that would get me to come back. Which I would like to do. I always liked the WotC community. Even with the few specific people who fight about everything (which is no different than on any other social site).
#2: Put in "Featured Topics". Things like this topic, the discussions in GD about the latest article (RoT, LoL, etc.), or just topics that a VCL/WoTC employee have seen and think are interesting would be good topics. They'd be a lot more helpful to the casual forumgoers like Aliothefool.
I'm going to go with Atf on the this one: I REALLY don't care about something that someone else thinks "Hey... Everyone should read this, and I have the power to make it so, Number 1!" I really don't care what most VCLs or WotC employees have to say; and if enough people care enough about what a WotC employee has to say, that employee has something called a "weekly article" on the main website. There's no need for them to post here. As for VCLs... I don't talk to them for the most part, and the only ones I do talk to are the ones that I knew and respected before the VCL program anyway.
#2: Put in "Featured Topics". Things like this topic, the discussions in GD about the latest article (RoT, LoL, etc.), or just topics that a VCL/WoTC employee have seen and think are interesting would be good topics. They'd be a lot more helpful to the casual forumgoers like Aliothefool.
I'm going to go with Atf on the this one: I REALLY don't care about something that someone else thinks "Hey... Everyone should read this, and I have the power to make it so, Number 1!" I really don't care what most VCLs or WotC employees have to say; and if enough people care enough about what a WotC employee has to say, that employee has something called a "weekly article" on the main website. There's no need for them to post here. As for VCLs... I don't talk to them for the most part, and the only ones I do talk to are the ones that I knew and respected before the VCL program anyway.
It's not like they're forcing you to read it; and it's a good way to let people know when WoTC employees want your input (like this thread or "What Works, What Doesn't") and are going to be reading certain topics.
In other words; my suggestions are just suggestions and features are just features. Nobody is going to use every single feature on the boards.
#2: Put in "Featured Topics". Things like this topic, the discussions in GD about the latest article (RoT, LoL, etc.), or just topics that a VCL/WoTC employee have seen and think are interesting would be good topics. They'd be a lot more helpful to the casual forumgoers like Aliothefool.
I'm going to go with Atf on the this one: I REALLY don't care about something that someone else thinks "Hey... Everyone should read this, and I have the power to make it so, Number 1!" I really don't care what most VCLs or WotC employees have to say; and if enough people care enough about what a WotC employee has to say, that employee has something called a "weekly article" on the main website. There's no need for them to post here. As for VCLs... I don't talk to them for the most part, and the only ones I do talk to are the ones that I knew and respected before the VCL program anyway.
It's not like they're forcing you to read it; and it's a good way to let people know when WoTC employees want your input (like this thread or "What Works, What Doesn't") and are going to be reading certain topics.
In other words; my suggestions are just suggestions and features are just features. Nobody is going to use every single feature on the boards.
Besides, they already have a similar feature. Most boards do. It's called a STICKY. If I read correctly, this would be similar, except putting them into one location. Not much different than the announcement sections they currently have.
My self(w)ish list:
- Like button
- I want a Like button for individual posts. NOT a Like link to Facebook. Just an internal +1 like feature so that I can let a poster know I like his comment without taking up an entire post to say so.
- Custom organization
- I visit a few specific forums. I would like to sort the forum tree to suit my own tastes.
- Real "block"
- I would prefer to not see anything by posters on my block list. Ever. Not to see that they posted. Not to see that someone else quoted them. Not ever. (I assume that folks who have me on their block list would prefer not to see evidence of my posts, either.)
- I suspect an added benefit of this feature would be a dramatic reduction in the number of "Report this post" use and thread closings. I know that certain posters set off my trigger points, and I assume I set off those of others. If we can't see each other, we don't bait or flame each other nearly as much.
I too want real block. I don't want where a person can hit quote to see the persons post, if they have that person on block. Not only that, if a person quotes someone I block, I can see their post and NOT the quoted part.
If you put someone on block and then continually respond to them, you are simply trolling and according to WoTC doing that is against the CoC. But they only seem to enforce it when they want to. Not when it's clearly happening. It's even more ridiculous when a person makes a big deal about how they have someone on block and then continues to post in a manner that is clearly addressing that person they have on block, either directly or indirectly.
And if I block someone, just like facebook does, They can't see what I'm posting. I block people because I don't want to have any interaction with them or I feel they are just trying to push my buttons.
If it ends up I have no one to talk to because I'm blocked or I have to many people blocked, it's my own dam fault, isn't it?
I've suggested this to WoTC and the response I've always "We don't want to stop the flow of communication." WHAT COMMUNICATION? It's just people bickering and trying to push buttons to get the other person banned. That's clearly not what you want.
And I agree with +1 as long as there isn't a -1. Say what you want about facebook, in all the years of people asking for a dislike button, they have never given one, simply because the abuse of it would be overwhelming.
I know WOTC feels people should manage themselves, but it's time to accept the fact that WoTC can't always expect people to do the right thing. I fully include myself in that.
It's not like they're forcing you to read it; and it's a good way to let people know when WoTC employees pretend towant your input (like this thread or "What Works, What Doesn't") and are going to be reading certain topics.
In other words; my suggestions are just suggestions and features are just features. Nobody is going to use every single feature on the boards.
I went through this with Gamer Zer0 once already, and it's starting to feel like more of the same. WotC seems to only want to know what you think if you agree. If you disagree, you start getting flamed, baited, trolled, and modded by its employees. Threads like this are a good idea, if they're actually used for their stated purpose. From personal experience, I say that's less common than we're supposed to realize. *shrug*
And judging by your expounding, your idea has merit, provided that it's used sparingly.
If you put someone on block and then continually respond to them, you are simply trolling and according to WoTC doing that is against the CoC. But they only seem to enforce it when they want to. Not when it's clearly happening.
Yeah. We know.
If you put someone on block and then continually respond to them, you are simply trolling and according to WoTC doing that is against the CoC. But they only seem to enforce it when they want to. Not when it's clearly happening. It's even more ridiculous when a person makes a big deal about how they have someone on block and then continues to post in a manner that is clearly addressing that person they have on block, either directly or indirectly.
That is not trolling.
Who people put on and off their block list is up to that person. They can do so as they see fit. Just like any other post, blocked or unblocked, they have every right to read and respond to whatever posts they choose to, as long as it is done in a civilized manner.
And if I block someone, just like facebook does, They can't see what I'm posting.
This is a public forum. You can choose what you want to read, but if you write it, it is public for everyone to read that chooses to read it.
#2: Put in "Featured Topics". Things like this topic, the discussions in GD about the latest article (RoT, LoL, etc.), or just topics that a VCL/WoTC employee have seen and think are interesting would be good topics. They'd be a lot more helpful to the casual forumgoers like Aliothefool.
I'm going to go with Atf on the this one: I REALLY don't care about something that someone else thinks "Hey... Everyone should read this, and I have the power to make it so, Number 1!" I really don't care what most VCLs or WotC employees have to say; and if enough people care enough about what a WotC employee has to say, that employee has something called a "weekly article" on the main website. There's no need for them to post here. As for VCLs... I don't talk to them for the most part, and the only ones I do talk to are the ones that I knew and respected before the VCL program anyway.
It's not like they're forcing you to read it; and it's a good way to let people know when WoTC employees want your input (like this thread or "What Works, What Doesn't") and are going to be reading certain topics.
In other words; my suggestions are just suggestions and features are just features. Nobody is going to use every single feature on the boards.
Besides, they already have a similar feature. Most boards do. It's called a STICKY. If I read correctly, this would be similar, except putting them into one location. Not much different than the announcement sections they currently have.
See where it says, "Most Viewed Topics" right under the "Recent Topics". Put in 5 topics that matter instead. For instance, I would think that this topic, RoT 8/23/11, whatever DDi article(s) were released today, and another few topics to fill it out for an even 5 would be on there.
If you put someone on block and then continually respond to them, you are simply trolling and according to WoTC doing that is against the CoC. But they only seem to enforce it when they want to. Not when it's clearly happening. It's even more ridiculous when a person makes a big deal about how they have someone on block and then continues to post in a manner that is clearly addressing that person they have on block, either directly or indirectly.
That is not trolling.
Who people put on and off their block list is up to that person. They can do so as they see fit. Just like any other post, blocked or unblocked, they have every right to read and respond to whatever posts they choose to, as long as it is done in a civilized manner.
Out of curiosity, why is it that posting "Reported" is trolling, but "Blocked" isn't? I think that was the point Dane was trying to make, at least judging by the bolded section.
You don't put a person on block because you think they have something worth reading. You put them on block because you don't want to see what they post. According to WoTC, to continue to respond to a poster over and over, that you have on block, is trolling because it means you are actively reading their posts. If you don't respond read all you want. It's the act of continue to respond to a person you block that is trolling.
AND
Trolling is against the CoC.
Also, this is NOT a public forum regardless of what people say. It's like people who say stores are Public places. No, they are not. They are private, and can kick people out without reason.
Public places are things like Library, opened to everyone, for everyone's use. And public places are often government funded. This forum isn't government funded, it privately funded.
Out of curiosity, why is it that posting "Reported" is trolling, but "Blocked" isn't? I think that was the point Dane was trying to make, at least judging by the bolded section.
I think "blocked" should be baiting, not trolling (though they are related). At any rate, this is all off-topic. We're supposed to be requestign Community Features, not the Code of Conduct, which would be a completely separate topic.
So, the features listed that I like...
- Reorganization/consolidation of forums
- Better search function, with filters and Boolean terms.
- Redirect links when a thread is moved.
- Like button (but no dislike button)
- A feature to prevent large images from "breaking" a screen.
- Ability to organize a personal forum map
- Direct links to the PBP and RPG Gamer classified forums
- Allow thread creator ability to delete posts.
- integrated dice roller
- Easier to access "My Groups"
- More Wiki functionality
- Ability to download threads
- Ability to add homebrewed stat blocks, like traps, monsters, and NPCs like we can now do for characters.
- Integrated stat block generator
- Eliminate "Most Viewed Topics". Possibly replace with staff recommendations.
At any rate, this is all off-topic. We're supposed to be requestign Community Features, not the Code of Conduct, which would be a completely separate topic.
If this forum had a like button, I would like this post.
The problem with the current most viewed is that things like the charop organization thread is always up there since it is a reference document and people like me are looking at it every week to find different links.
I am not sure I agree with allowing the thread creator to delete posts. That is not inherently a bad idea and I would like it for a couple of the threads I have created, but could be abused easily.
More wiki functionality. I would love to be able to format an entry like a monster or trap stat block. And perhaps have a way for ceratin entires on a wiki page to be viewable by the ceratin users (i.e. DM info or secret info for the DM and a particular player).
This thread is for discussion and feedback on the tools and functions of the Community site. This thread is not the place to discuss practices and policies, including those relating to moderation.
Further posts that are not on topic will be viewed as disruptive.
Staff post trackers - On many MMO forums, they have a feature wherein every post by staff members is also tracked in a seperate forum. See boards.cityofheroes.com/tracker.php?do=s... for a nice example.
1 - better thread-subscription (it's almost unusable right now)
2 - limiting the size of signatures (in pixels), if it doesn't fit, it is cutoff - no need to burden yourself (or us) with scroll bars and such. I'd sugest making it 5 lines of text high. It's a signature, not a memoir.
3 - not sure about the +1 thing...
4 - ease of use of Groups - I click Groups, I go to my groups.
5 - the ability to set a default forum : so as when I click on the forum tab, I get sent to my default forum - I can tell you right now, I'm not going to the DuelMasters' forums - save yourself the bandwidth.
6 - less layers of things to load - save us both the bandwidth and RAM (I'm a pluri-tab user)
7 - analogue to (6) - have a minimalist theme available.
8 - (sorry for the generality of this) All around ease of use : I click it, I go to it, not to a screen, then another screen, then another... and finally the one containing what I tought the first one I clicked meant. I'm currently navigating this site via bookmarks. I understand you want people to see all the cool toys you have to offer, but for actual users, all those extra steps to get where we want to be means we'll create our own paths and so you annoy us both : I have to set-up my own "web of this site" and all the cool things you spend so much time putting up and showing off do not get viewed.
9 - A form of "box" in our profile page (the 1st one that is shown when someone clicks on us - and right there at the top) where we could put links and descriptions there off to threads, posts, etc which we wish to show case. The goal being that visitors get a fast and easy way to find what we think they would like to see. Examples would be build-threads from LDB, or DM Competitions from Wrecan
I do agree that trying to keep signatures are reasonable size is a good idea.
A search function that is useful.
Being able to see a list of a user's posts somewhere in their profile, including my own. Sometimes my replies get buried when a thread takes off, and it'd be nice to have a way to find my own posts. It's also useful to be able to find posts of other users, as well.
I have no problem with the search function. I'm able to find obscure threads that are a couple years old in just a few minutes of looking. But I do think the search function can be much improved.
I agree with your second point. With the previous forums we had an ability to look up the last like hundred posts of a poster which of course included ourselves. Made it easier to find recent posts of someone that were in some obscure thread that we can't remember the title to and whatnot.
My self(w)ish list:
- Like button
- I want a Like button for individual posts. NOT a Like link to Facebook. Just an internal +1 like feature so that I can let a poster know I like his comment without taking up an entire post to say so.
I support this idea. I'm not sure though if this should be something that is just on the post/thread or something that gets applied to a person's profile. Like lets say I say some great piece of advice and a lot of people like it so they like/thumbs-up/+1 it. Maybe the post has that it was liked/thumbs-uped/+1ed 100 times or/and it could relate to me having 100 like/thumbs-up/+1 points on my profile which would relate to me being now more respected for giving good advice. I think it would be OK as long as there isn't a negative option but +1ing something can be used negatively in a way... sorta. Like with flame wars go on groups can mass +1 each other's posts/threads to try and inflate each other's "reputations".
Anyways what would probably be a good control for this is making it so you can only like a person so often or have to like a certain number of people before you can like a certain person again.
- Make Groups easier to reach. Currently you need to do "Groups" -> "My groups" and then pick the group you want. Why not just put a dropdown at the main "Groups" on every page where you can immediately jump to your groups? Why not even just add the Group forums to the rest of the forums on the main overview?
I agree groups need to be easier to reach although with the use of bookmarks they can be reached with just a couple of clicks.
2 Likes.
- The first is a global like. It lets the person know that someone liked their post. Something like is on EN World.
- The second like is a personal like. It would allow me to see, when looking at the listing of threads, if a person on my like list has posted in that thread. For example, lets say I have wrecan, seeker95 and Robin_Hoodlum on my personal like list. Then, when i look at the thread titles, there is a symbol of some sort that allows me to see that someone on my list has posted in a thread. To take it farther, I can then mouse-over that thread to see a pop-up listing who on my liek list has posted in that thread.
Just don't add any Facebook/Twitter share stuff and I'll probably be happy-ish enough. ;)
^This. Some of us want to keep our RL and online personae separate.
- Allow thread creator ability to delete posts.
This is one I'm against. As much as I hate it when people post stupid CoC violating stuff in threads I make I don't like the idea that a person should be able to just edit their own posts. ORCs and whatnot are supposed to mod without bias. Us forum goers will likely be modding with much bias. It will likely kill much conversation since a thread creator will be able to kill off any post from anybody with a differing view. I mean it could be good in an ideal world but realistically it would be bad.
If you want to be able to edit stuff you don't like then create a group. You can mod to your heart's content.
-----------------
Link in quote to quoted post
OK here is one I have been missing since the forums were moved to here. On the old gleemax forums when we quoted someone there was a link in the quote back to the quoted post. As far as I know all that there is currently is a link to the quoted poster's profile. I found this useful for quite a few reasons, but one of the big ones is that we often don't quote a whole post (often edit stuffs out). Sometimes it's good to go back and reread an older post in its entirety, but it might be 20+ posts back so manually searching for it is a pain. The other use I found for it was if a person was quoted in a sig. If I quote a person I'd like to give credit where credit is due and have a link back to their full post.
html Drop box for sigs
html is used for sigs and well the html code isn't anywhere that I've seen on the sig makin' screen. It makes it a pain when trying to make your sig cuz ya have to look up all the html code. Having an easier way to input it all to properly code a sig would make things worlds easier.
bbcode and sigs
currently some bbcode but not all works in sigs. I'd suggest making it so all of it works or none of it works for sigs. It just seems silly to go halfway with this.
Effective way to search for other posters?
I've got a "huge" post count ;) and I sometimes like to measure it with others. The old gleemax forums had a thing were we could look up other posters in a sort of directory which displayed their name, date of activation (i think), post count and stuff. We could organize this directory by the different categories so it would make it easy for me to find which posters had the highest post counts. Anyways, I'd like a more efficient way for me to measure myself against other posters. I guess what I'm saying is I need an ego boost. ;)
Someone mentioned this but never came back to it; Sigs, no more than 200 Characters. There is no reason for someons sig to take up a quarter of the computer screen.
I do like the idea of placing the forum topics in whatever order the poster wants to look at them in.
What could be done is implement something so that a person's sig is only shown on their first post of a page instead of with every post.
I suggested a dropbox or something for sig coding. With something like that it will be easy for people to add spoiler blocks to their sigs so they can make a large sig small thus there not being a need for a character limit to sigs.
In the past I had links to some of my threads as well as PbP characters so they were all at easy access for me so yeah I'd kinda dislike a character limit for that reason.... and stuff.
Want
- Community Separation (D&D from MTG); if I’m in the D&D community what do I care about MTG post and vice versa
- Community Polls that work and a list of previous polls
- A better working search engine
- Better Tag list with complete Category listing
- When starting threads the add additional category should allow for the above lists
- Overall better organization of community page, but not completely necessary if search engine would work.
- Tighter line breaks between quotes, bullets or lists, and tables – too much white space
- Working spell check
- Better subscription tracking
- Overall better organization of community page, but not completely necessary if search engine would work.
- NO PICs in signatures
- Better Wiki (OP is a good example)
Neutral
- +1/like buttons – basically kind of lame, but if it is added it should not tally towards the users posts count
- Block Ability – While I may not like what some people say I still find their post useful at times
- Link to quoted post
Don’ts
- Facebook/Twitter styling/sharing
I would like some automatic way to notify all members of a group whenever updates are made to the group wiki, forums, etc.
More wiki functionality. I would love to be able to format an entry like a monster or trap stat block. And perhaps have a way for ceratin entires on a wiki page to be viewable by the ceratin users (i.e. DM info or secret info for the DM and a particular player).
This is a very good suggestion! I'm not currently running a game, but for the time I was, I had a wiki set up for the campaign on this site. My group got used to checking it once between sessions, but it was usually the day before the next meeting, and by then any discussion we could've had on the postings was out of the window. We wound up wasting time before the game discussing things I posted (recaps, houserule proposals) which was a bit self-defeating. Had the group been aware I had posted new information, we might have had more constructive dialog on the wiki and not spent valuable face time on the topics.
I'm actually planning to rejoin the group at some point in the (hopefully) near future. If this feature could be added, I would definitely consider it a boon.
(The post I quoted is a perfect example of the usefulness of some kind of "thumbs up" button. I have a feeling many people would find this option useful, whether they take the time to quote it or not.)
Want
Community Separation (D&D from MTG); if I’m in the D&D community what do I care about MTG post and vice versa
I'm not challenging this want. Rather, what would this look like? (And how are they currently not separate? I've been on the Boards for ten years, and I have never seen a Magic-the-Gathering post or forum beyond its presence in the drop down Jump box and a single icon on the master Forums home page.)
Want
Community Separation (D&D from MTG); if I’m in the D&D community what do I care about MTG post and vice versa
I'm not challenging this want. Rather, what would this look like? (And how are they currently not separate? I've been on the Boards for ten years, and I have never seen a Magic-the-Gathering post or forum beyond its presence in the drop down Jump box and a single icon on the master Forums home page.)
And there are a lot of people that play both and quite like the convenience of having one account for both.
Want
Community Separation (D&D from MTG); if I’m in the D&D community what do I care about MTG post and vice versa
I'm not challenging this want. Rather, what would this look like? (And how are they currently not separate? I've been on the Boards for ten years, and I have never seen a Magic-the-Gathering post or forum beyond its presence in the drop down Jump box and a single icon on the master Forums home page.)
What I took it as was a reference to (for example) being in the D&D forums and seeing the newest posts... and four of them are from Magic. If it was a case of being able to only see the newest posts for that specific forum, I could get behind it. If (s)he is advocating for a complete separation of the boards, I'm with you and Jharii.
What I took it as was a reference to (for example) being in the D&D forums and seeing the newest posts... and four of them are from Magic. If it was a case of being able to only see the newest posts for that specific forum, I could get behind it. If (s)he is advocating for a complete separation of the boards, I'm with you and Jharii.
That's the way I took it as well. I have some mixed feelings on that. On one hand, I don't particularly care what's going on in the MtG forums and it seems like usually half the posts listed are from there. On the other hand, it has caused me to pop into the Star Wars forums (which I don't usually frequent since I never played the WotC version of the RPG) a couple times because I saw a thread that piqued my interest.
Want
Community Separation (D&D from MTG); if I’m in the D&D community what do I care about MTG post and vice versa
I'm not challenging this want. Rather, what would this look like? (And how are they currently not separate? I've been on the Boards for ten years, and I have never seen a Magic-the-Gathering post or forum beyond its presence in the drop down Jump box and a single icon on the master Forums home page.)
What I took it as was a reference to (for example) being in the D&D forums and seeing the newest posts... and four of them are from Magic. If it was a case of being able to only see the newest posts for that specific forum, I could get behind it. If (s)he is advocating for a complete separation of the boards, I'm with you and Jharii.
Gotcha. Something like an option to check/uncheck which forums we would like included in the most recent posts. That I can definitely get behind.
For me, when I have a lull in my D&D gaming, I'll play some MtGOnline, and will check those threads during that time and be uninterested in them when I am not playing Magic.
I'll say that this is an issue I am neutral with. What might be best is to make it so everyone can set up their account to have only thread popupage (or whatever it's called) from forums they're interested in. So like D&D and Starwars only or maybe just MtG only or whatevs and stuff.
Or everyone can just learn to use bookmarks just like me.
I've never had to worry about that concern you guys are talking right now because I navigate these boards via bookmarks.
I'll say that this is an issue I am neutral with. What might be best is to make it so everyone can set up their account to have only thread popupage (or whatever it's called) from forums they're interested in. So like D&D and Starwars only or maybe just MtG only or whatevs and stuff.
Or everyone can just learn to use bookmarks just like me.
It's not a bookmark thing. The forum's "home page" has the top 5 most recent topics and top 5 most viewed topics. Even though we are on the Dungeons and Dragons forum "home" it lists MtG (and other) topics in those lists.
I've never had to worry about that concern you guys are talking right now because I navigate these boards via bookmarks.
I'll say that this is an issue I am neutral with. What might be best is to make it so everyone can set up their account to have only thread popupage (or whatever it's called) from forums they're interested in. So like D&D and Starwars only or maybe just MtG only or whatevs and stuff.
Or everyone can just learn to use bookmarks just like me.
It's not a bookmark thing. The forum's "home page" has the top 5 most recent topics and top 5 most viewed topics. Even though we are on the Dungeons and Dragons forum "home" it lists MtG (and other) topics in those lists.
Maybe I've not stated this well enough. Because I navigate these forums via bookmarks I don't think I've seen the forum "home" for a year or two. Or maybe I have but when I'm looking for a new sub forum I want to bookmark, but then I'm not looking at those thread suggestions. So yeah if ya bookmark all the places you want to go or need to ever go it makes navigating the boards 100% easier.
It is a pain in the butt to get to the OTTer group via the boards. I realized this a long time ago so I bookmarked it. Now I can navigate there with just a single click.
Truth be told probably no matter how convenient they make navigation using bookmarks will probably always be more convenient.
Now I'm not saying this isn't an issue that shouldn't be addressed and whatnot, but sayin' that it probably isn't that pressing of an issue since any properly lazy person would already be using bookmarks to navigate and would see it as a non issue.
Unless this is already available, and I just haven't found it.
I'd like the option to turn off the ability for anyone being able to click on the little head and shoulders to the left, and see all my forum posts.
Unless this is already available, and I just haven't found it.
Yeah, I'd be interested in that as well.
I'd like the option to turn off the ability for anyone being able to click on the little head and shoulders to the left, and see all my forum posts.
Unless this is already available, and I just haven't found it.
Yeah, I'd be interested in that as well.
If you didn't post, ZB, you'd have nothing to worry about.
I doubt that many people are even aware of that. I didn't even know about it until mentioned just now.
I'd like the option to turn off the ability for anyone being able to click on the little head and shoulders to the left, and see all my forum posts.
Unless this is already available, and I just haven't found it.
Yeah, I'd be interested in that as well.
So that's how you find all of everyone posts. I should actually click on those head thingies over there. I knew how to do that on the old gleemax forums but never bothered to try and learn how on these um whatever forums.
That's a feature I like. I think it's one of teh things I talked about up above and junk. Like if i remember someone recently posting something but not remembering what thread they posted it in. boom I can find it. That is unless it was me who posted it because that's a possible 23k posts to look through....
Ok lets compromise. Make it so it can be set to a friends only thing?
Um something I think that might be good to incorporate is to give the poster with the most posts some kind of bling. Now I'm not saying this because I'm roughly 98% sure that I have the most posts, but rather because um.... well.... I guess what I'm trying to say is I want some forum bling and so it would be a good feature.
It could say something silly like "For excellence in the lack of a life" or something like that. If you didn't post, ZB, you'd have nothing to worry about.
Well, that's certainly one way to go about it. But the voices ... they're so damned loud ...
@frankster:
I'm pretty sure you can only see people's post history like that if they're not set to private. If they are, they can set it so friends can see it. Thing is, since I'm a group mod and can invite, I discovered it made my life a lot easier turning the private setting off - which I really didn't want to do. So it would be nice to have as a separate option.
It could say something silly like "For excellence in the lack of a life" or something like that.
I think a simple "bling" icon would work. I have my Scribe tag. You could have your Bling tag.
Now... if they would just give us old timers our pre-reset post count back, I could maybe have one of those Blings too. I lost 20,000 posts in the transfer to the new boards. And as long as we are actually displaying post counts, I think that it should display accurate post counts.
It could say something silly like "For excellence in the lack of a life" or something like that.
I think a simple "bling" icon would work. I have my Scribe tag. You could have your Bling tag.
What about an icon of a can of Spam??
If you didn't post, ZB, you'd have nothing to worry about.
Well, that's certainly one way to go about it. But the voices ... they're so damned loud ...
They are much more diminished since I've taken a hiatus from OTT.
If you didn't post, ZB, you'd have nothing to worry about.
Well, that's certainly one way to go about it. But the voices ... they're so damned loud ...
@frankster:
I'm pretty sure you can only see people's post history like that if they're not set to private. If they are, they can set it so friends can see it. Thing is, since I'm a group mod and can invite, I discovered it made my life a lot easier turning the private setting off - which I really didn't want to do. So it would be nice to have as a separate option.
Actually that's a good point, make it so that people with their privacy settings on can still receive emails, friend requests, and group invites, unless the person turns those options off specifically.
I think a simple "bling" icon would work. I have my Scribe tag. You could have your Bling tag.
Now... if they would just give us old timers our pre-reset post count back, I could maybe have one of those Blings too. I lost 20,000 posts in the transfer to the new boards. And as long as we are actually displaying post counts, I think that it should display accurate post counts.
Just a bling icon could work too.
With the forum switcharoo I'm sure I lost a few thousand posts but I didn't really pay attention to that all that much.
What about an icon of a can of Spam??
That might work best for me since I'm an OTTer and so everyone might see most of what I post as such.
Oh maybe these boards could have something dumb like a 20k club where like anybody with that many posts get a 'bling' icon or somethin'. Ya know something so they can toot their own horn and stuff. I don't know about the rest of you but I really enjoy horn tooting.
#1 More integration between these boards and DDI
I want to be able to share any asset I can create and edit on these boards and have the sharing go both ways in the programs (in other words, I can share directly from my CB already but I would like to be able to click someone's shared character and have it show up in my builder). I'm not so sure if that's outside the scope of this request but it's the number one thing I would like to see.
#2 Better Blog searching/support
I can never find a blog unless I'm linked to one. Even staff blogs. I think that might be a problem.
The friend/invite person to group/send a message thing does have some bugs and some discomforts. For instance, I've heard a lot of people say that they've got to turn privacy settings off to get group invites or friend requests or the like.
Some others have already commented on the problems I have and while I do use bookmarks, I still use the toolbar at the top of the screen that offers other features of the site. Some of these have the means to offer a choice to select either D&D or MTG, others don't.
For instance Featured - Recent Threats has a both options plus a Recent - the problem with the recent is that it includes both and doesn't link D&D post updates. That is to say after I posts this it will appear in D&D but not the Recent or vice versa.
I play MTG and surf their threads, but when I want D&D and don’t want MTG popping up. Type GOBLIN SOCIETY into the search bar at the top and you’ll see part of the problem.
Part of the problem lies in the fact that they are in the same community, but the other is the lack of tags and designed tag sub-categories, which can be used to isolate MTG and D&D. The other is the poor search engine.
A simple solution would have a MTG or D&D at the top toolbar that would prevent such crossings using tags.
#1 More integration between these boards and DDI
Building on this, I could see the following integration features:
- Auto-linking to Compendium entries.
- The Compendium already has a finite, searchable database. It should be easy to double click on a word in a post and then click a Compendium link button and have it automatically link to that entry. A reader clicking on that entry would then either get a pop-up of the entry *or* a new window/tab presenting that entry.
- This would be very useful for those who hang out in the rules forum helping newbies and rules-questions.
- It would also be useful for the Char-Op boards to make the handbooks more interactive.
- Character stat block import.
- On the CharOp/CharDev boards, there are quite often folks who want help pimping their characters. It would be neat to be able to just import a stat block from our CB to show where they are in their build.
#1 More integration between these boards and DDI
Building on this, I could see the following integration features:
- Auto-linking to Compendium entries.
- The Compendium already has a finite, searchable database. It should be easy to double click on a word in a post and then click a Compendium link button and have it automatically link to that entry. A reader clicking on that entry would then either get a pop-up of the entry *or* a new window/tab presenting that entry.
- This would be very useful for those who hang out in the rules forum helping newbies and rules-questions.
- It would also be useful for the Char-Op boards to make the handbooks more interactive.
- Character stat block import.
- On the CharOp/CharDev boards, there are quite often folks who want help pimping their characters. It would be neat to be able to just import a stat block from our CB to show where they are in their build.
To further build on this (:p), the stat block posting should be somehow clickable so I can open the full character in my Character Builder, make a change or two and then post it back as feedback.
Also the compendium idea is really cool. Perhaps even a button in the toolbar that allows you to link to a specific compendium entry.
Seriously, it would be nice to talk about beer, Star Wars, and world records without seeing this:
****ss Stout, Alec ****ss, ****ss Book of World Records
And yes, that's a serious request.
It's a variant spelling for an offensive term for Italian-Americans.
But I can still talk about Papua New Guinea and guinea pigs? I can't use a "variant spelling" that I've never before seen in print, but I can use the regular spelling?! That's got to be the absolute most ridiculous thing I've read this month. And I read Cracked!
Make the filter stop taking out the word "Guiness". Or at least explain why it's in there.
Seriously, it would be nice to talk about beer, Star Wars, and world records without seeing this:
****ss Stout, Alec ****ss, ****ss Book of World Records
And yes, that's a serious request.
I +1 this
It's a variant spelling for an offensive term for Italian-Americans.
But I can still talk about Papua New Guinea and guinea pigs? I can't use a "variant spelling" that I've never before seen in print, but I can use the regular spelling?! That's got to be the absolute most ridiculous thing I've read this month. And I read Cracked!
Good point I +1 it.
It's a variant spelling for an offensive term for Italian-Americans. And yet, I can say "There's a chink in my armor."
And if you look up guine* on urban dictionary you get 3 definitions. 2 say it refers to italians but nothing about their definition implies that the word is offensive. One just says italian and the other says a good looking italian. Um so yeah if it doesn't have a slur definition on urban dictionary it has no reason being masked.
Also I'd like to point out that if it's a variant spelling and not an original spelling then it has no reason being filtered and the use of the variant in an offensive manner is of course masking bad language. but even still there are quite a few words that have guine as a part of it but it seems ****ss is the only word that has **** in it that gets filtered on these forums. Um total BS if you ask me.
If words are going to be filtered they should actually filter actual slurs and expletives.
Now an actual slur for italians is dago. A very common and widely known one. How come that word is fine but **** is not?
consistency please with filters?--------------------------
*I looked up **** as apposed to guine and its a bit more offensive but not really. I'm mean it's a sorta specific definition but as someone that's partially italian it's one of the italian slurs I've never heard. But it wasn't even bad. Rich and spoiled italian girl. Um is that horrible? Might not be nice but it's not all that harsh either. *shrug*
It would also be great if Wiki pages could be designated DDi-subscriber only. That way linking to the Compendium could be included on the wiki without giving out free info to non-subscribers.
Wouldn't the link just not work for anyone who isn't a subscriber. I'd hate to otherwise be denied cool ideas just because of a couple links I'm not paying for.
It would also be great if Wiki pages could be designated DDi-subscriber only. That way linking to the Compendium could be included on the wiki without giving out free info to non-subscribers.
Wouldn't the link just not work for anyone who isn't a subscriber. I'd hate to otherwise be denied cool ideas just because of a couple links I'm not paying for.
it's all a ploy to get you to subscribe to DDi!
DDi had it's chance. It failed to keep it's useability.
I was just making a funny. It doesn't have to become a DDi bash rant. And if you were trying to be funny back, nevermind.
It would also be great if Wiki pages could be designated DDi-subscriber only. That way linking to the Compendium could be included on the wiki without giving out free info to non-subscribers.
Wouldn't the link just not work for anyone who isn't a subscriber. I'd hate to otherwise be denied cool ideas just because of a couple links I'm not paying for.
As a subscriber, I would find it absolutely useful to be able to integrate the Compendium with wiki articles. I'm sorry nonsubscribers wouldn't get the benefits without paying for it.
It would also be great if Wiki pages could be designated DDi-subscriber only. That way linking to the Compendium could be included on the wiki without giving out free info to non-subscribers.
Wouldn't the link just not work for anyone who isn't a subscriber. I'd hate to otherwise be denied cool ideas just because of a couple links I'm not paying for.
As a subscriber, I would find it absolutely useful to be able to integrate the Compendium with wiki articles. I'm sorry nonsubscribers wouldn't get the benefits without paying for it.
Something similar to the CARD tag that is currently used on the Magic side of things.
But I kind of saw a lot of people specifically say they didn't want the whole facebook/twitter thing, and I don't recall anyone saying they did want that.
They are also at both the top and the bottom of the post. Do we need them in both paces?
Over all, it's like old MySpace pages, with stuff all over the place.
Also, this was Dane's score when I spotted all of this bliss... Even with a discrete scoring system, you can give out non-discrete ratings! It's awesome!
Also!!! Because all these fancy new thingamajigs allow me to, and thus endorse, pander to my narcissism, here it my first post under the new system glorified for all!
It's also making a considerable difference in how fast things load. I'm not at home, but when I get home, if the drop-off in speed here is any indication, I'm going to have a hard time posting.
SSSssssssssssllllooooooooowwwwwwwww!
Really WotC, we've been through this. You implemented this once before, and rolled it back because everyone hated it and it made the forums incredibly slow and annoying to use. There's just too much attached to each post now. Too many links, too many icons, too much information blasted into each post. It's awkward to read posts, especially short ones which are quite common, with both the header and footer having all the different ways we can be awesome social people. Plus it makes loading pages terrible. I set my posts-per-page count to 40 because it's annoying enough to have to switch pages to track a lengthy conversation, but with the decreased load speed that won't be convenient.
This appears to be the same system we rejected before, only now there's also a Tweet button. I don't come here to tweet individual posts, I come here to read posts and interact with this forum as a forum.
Do. Not. Want.
BTW, a real feature request;
Could you guys bring back the custom forum titles (of course with just a select few being able to edit them). The XDMC competitions would become even more lively
Amusingly, I got ninjaed by OneSite. Thanks for getting it fixed this quickly.
It's also making a considerable difference in how fast things load. I'm not at home, but when I get home, if the drop-off in speed here is any indication, I'm going to have a hard time posting.
SSSssssssssssllllooooooooowwwwwwwww!
slow indeed. I might need to change my forums setting from 40 posts per page to 20 to speed things up. This is a lot of stuffs on the page now. And does all that extra stuff need to be on each post twice?
Granted, this is probably that silly OneSite company rolling out stuff without prior approval, just like last time. They'll probably call it a day after this oops and remove all of it tomorrow.
It has become tomorrow! Today!
Pretty awesome how much posts have been racked up in that little amount of time. Good thing I saved it all for prosperity.
Granted, this is probably that silly OneSite company rolling out stuff without prior approval, just like last time. They'll probably call it a day after this oops and remove all of it tomorrow.
It has become tomorrow! Today!
Pretty awesome how much posts have been racked up in that little amount of time. Good thing I saved it all for prosperity.
Sooo, what does that make yesterday?
Every time I cut and paste, I have to deal with wierd spacing, multiple fonts and the forum website inserting code that bolds and bullets items that I don't want in bold or as a bullet point.
I'm not a coder. I shouldn't have to hit the Edit HTML Source in order to edit my damn posts.
If it were possible to customize my formatting options so every time I post a response I already have things set how I like them, well that would be awesome.
It would also be great if Wiki pages could be designated DDi-subscriber only. That way linking to the Compendium could be included on the wiki without giving out free info to non-subscribers.
Wouldn't the link just not work for anyone who isn't a subscriber. I'd hate to otherwise be denied cool ideas just because of a couple links I'm not paying for.
As a subscriber, I would find it absolutely useful to be able to integrate the Compendium with wiki articles. I'm sorry nonsubscribers wouldn't get the benefits without paying for it.
*facepalm*
Who said anything about getting benefits of DDI without paying? Did you miss the part where I said I would be fine with the DDI portions not working for me, I just want don't want an entire page of useful stuff to be locked to me because it contains one DDI link?
Did you miss the part where I said I would be fine with the DDI portions not working for me
My guess would be that indeed he did. And if he did, it makes his response understandable, and his error forgivable.
We can all give each other the benefit of the doubt a bit more on here.
Did you miss the part where I said I would be fine with the DDI portions not working for me
I did. I'm sorry.
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
Did you miss the part where I said I would be fine with the DDI portions not working for me
I did. I'm sorry.
No worries. I wanted to make sure you weren't being deliberately difficult. But it looks like we're on the same page after all.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
Just want to be totally clear here, too.
I want a like button, and I agree with EVERYTHING Zombie_Babies said in his post.
Just want to be totally clear here, too.
I want a like button, and I agree with EVERYTHING Zombie_Babies said in his post.
In another thread, WotC Michelle stated that those extra buttons were a glitch and that they had no plans to actually add 'em. So, sounds good to me. With the fair amount of support for a like button presented (personally I'm impartial), I'd say it's a safe bet that they're workin' on somethin' for us on that front. Can't say for certain, of course.
EDIT: So ya'all don't have to dig:
Sorry guys, this was just a small glitch. We don't intend to bring these back.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
/give a +1 to ZB
Ya know how at the top right of the posts where it says 'Report Post', when ya hover above it it says 'Report this Content'. Would it be possible to change that pop up display to say 'Call for ORC Reinforcements' or something in that manner?
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
As long as the less than turtle speed forums do not get any slower I'm fine with a +1 button, or abutton. I'd even be happy with a
button if the forums did not get any slower.
+1.
If there was a +1 button, then I wouldn't have to quote and type this +1 message. Conversely, if there was a -1 button, I wouldn't have to type this message to disagree, but then again, there would not even be a request for this feature if it already existed, so I would not even be able to click -1.
And I timed the loadtime for one of my threads since I normally have it set to 40 posts at a time and with the all the clutter it was 55 seconds and without less than 1 second.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
As long as the less than turtle speed forums do not get any slower I'm fine with a +1 button, or a
If a -1 button is added, could there be an option to hide posts that are below a user-set rating? It might reduce a certain amount of baiting/trolling since once enough people dislike the post most other users won't even see it unless they choose specifically to view it.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
As long as the less than turtle speed forums do not get any slower I'm fine with a +1 button, or a
If a -1 button is added, could there be an option to hide posts that are below a user-set rating? It might reduce a certain amount of baiting/trolling since once enough people dislike the post most other users won't even see it unless they choose specifically to view it.
The only problem I see with that is the possibility for griefing by a group of people who may have a grudge against another poster. Consistently downvoting his/her posts to be no longer visible.
I personally find it annoying how all links come out this red color thingy.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
As long as the less than turtle speed forums do not get any slower I'm fine with a +1 button, or a
If a -1 button is added, could there be an option to hide posts that are below a user-set rating? It might reduce a certain amount of baiting/trolling since once enough people dislike the post most other users won't even see it unless they choose specifically to view it.
The only problem I see with that is the possibility for griefing by a group of people who may have a grudge against another poster. Consistently downvoting his/her posts to be no longer visible.
The option would still be there to show it... and it may teach people to be nicer in general (a person doesn't become disliked by groups of people for no reason).
We can't really electrifiy the keyboard. It wouldn't be such a bad thing.
Is there a way to make links whatever color you wish? If so could we get an easier way to make links whatever color we wish?
I personally find it annoying how all links come out this red color thingy.
I'm pretty sure the different themes have different link colors. I don't know cuz I never changed mine from Magic once I set it (it was the easiest on the eyes back in the early phases of The White Doom) but I'm pretty sure I saw people say that. Or something.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
As long as the less than turtle speed forums do not get any slower I'm fine with a +1 button, or a
If a -1 button is added, could there be an option to hide posts that are below a user-set rating? It might reduce a certain amount of baiting/trolling since once enough people dislike the post most other users won't even see it unless they choose specifically to view it.
The only problem I see with that is the possibility for griefing by a group of people who may have a grudge against another poster. Consistently downvoting his/her posts to be no longer visible.
Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
Just want to be totally, totally clear about something:
A like button is ok.
If the only way to implement a like button is to also implement Facebook/Twitter share capability, then the like button is not fine. I'd say most of us don't want that stuff and the biggest reason is how badly it impacts forum performance. Thanks.
As long as the less than turtle speed forums do not get any slower I'm fine with a +1 button, or a
If a -1 button is added, could there be an option to hide posts that are below a user-set rating? It might reduce a certain amount of baiting/trolling since once enough people dislike the post most other users won't even see it unless they choose specifically to view it.
The only problem I see with that is the possibility for griefing by a group of people who may have a grudge against another poster. Consistently downvoting his/her posts to be no longer visible.
Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
This.
I mean, we all know that there aren't any groups or cliques on the forums that don't like certain people; but let's not set up something just to see it happen, right?
Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
This.
I mean, we all know that there aren't any groups or cliques on the forums that don't like certain people; but let's not set up something just to see it happen, right?
A -1 or
could be useful. People may use it rather than automatically hitting the report button. A -1 or
That runs counter to everything I've ever observed about human behavior on the internet. People will use the
and the report button every time. I'd rather not have another way for people to contribute negativity to the forus. A button? great. ? No.Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
This.
I mean, we all know that there aren't any groups or cliques on the forums that don't like certain people; but let's not set up something just to see it happen, right?
A -1 or
Instead of having a global +/-1, have the +1 be global/local and the -1 be solely local.
By that I mean that the +1s that you apply go both the the forums ("look, some random person on the intartubeez likes this post") as well as on a local setting ("This person says good things"). The -1, OTOH, goes towards local only ("99% of what this person posts is image macros.").
Then each person sets their threshold. When a post is below the set threshold, it is automagically minimized. One possibility with this is that if someone whom you have downvoted on your personal list post something that a lot of people find well-written and that a lot of people have upvoted, then it could be bumped above your threshold so that you could see that and decide to maybe give poster X a second chance. (There would, of course, still be the ignore feature if you are *certain* that you don't want to read what soemone is posting.)
Edit to add - A downvote should not be uised in place of a report button. The two have very different purposes and shouldn't be mixed.
Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
This.
I mean, we all know that there aren't any groups or cliques on the forums that don't like certain people; but let's not set up something just to see it happen, right?
A -1 or
If something needs to be reported, then people should hit the report button.
There should be a difference. -1 as people other than you have said is meant to be a simple disagreement with something someone said, which may mean that they're -1ing something that isn't against the CoC. Now on the other hand, if the mods were to have a system where -1ing something was meant to be a signal to mods that something needs to be modded, that would be different. But it can't be both.
Edit: Sorry for "piling on". When I clicked reply, Wrecan and Mudbunny had not yet posted.
My interest in having a +1 has nothing to do with pre-evaluating a person or even a post. My interest is that I like letting someone know that I agree with them. But right now, to do that, I need to tell everyone else that I agree as well, by posting in a separate post. I want the +1 button so that I can let someone know I like their post without taking up thread space to do so.
Exactly. There doesn't need to be a feature to announce to the forums you don't like something. A feature like that would just be condoning that it's ok to be negative for the sake of being negative and crapping on someone's post.
This.
I mean, we all know that there aren't any groups or cliques on the forums that don't like certain people; but let's not set up something just to see it happen, right?
A -1 or
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
The forums can be pretty negative already, we don't need to add an official way to justify it. And the idea that it would save people time by not reading threads that get a lot of -1's, that's silly.
That's basically saying most people can't think or judge for themselves. If they start reading something and don't like it, they can stop reading and go on to the next post.
It's like Seeker suggested, +1 is just a way of saying you like something, but have nothing to add.
All this talk of posters being able to rate other posters good or bad (Which is what the whole +1/-1 is taking on) is wrong. Posters shouldn't have ANY ability to control another posters rating on the forums. If the person is wrong or whatever, people can judge that for themselves.
Look at eBay, the buyer/seller rating system is totally useless, because people care more about having all great reviews, and not a single bad one. So it becomes meaningless. Oh look you've got 500 reviews all saying you are super awesome. Then how come my purchase came shipped in a plastic grocery bag, and took 5 weeks till you shipped it out? And was damaged. Oh you will give me a refund if I take back my honest review and I can keep the item?
If something needs to be reported, then people should hit the report button.
What's interesting is that the need is determined by the report. That is to say, if it's not being reported, does it need to be?
(I'm jus' bein' an ass.
)With that being said having been on a forum that had both a report button and +/- rep things would get nasty. Well the rep thing there when you gave someone +/- rep you could leave a comment and the person being repped could read it on their profile. It is annonymous but often people would sign their + rep and troll with - rep. Even sometimes trying to sign as someone else when giving - rep. The main part of it though is that groups were clearly drawn on these forums and they'd mass + rep each other and group - rep **** other groups.
A big problem on those forums was with new posters. If their english was bad or they made a bad point because of ignorance or whatnot they'd get a huge - rep dump.
And on those forums more often than not - rep and the report button were used simultaneously.
-----------
oh just had a thought. If we have a global forum tally thingy of total +1's a poster has received I think that should get cut into a bit every time they get banned. Your +1's should be a representation of being a good forum poster. So like giving good advice and helpin' folks out. If you're getting banned you're probably didn't get banned while doing that.
Oh and maybe the only way to get minus +1's is to just be banned a lot and stuff. It would be a reflection of this guy is a problem maker or something
If something needs to be reported, then people should hit the report button.
What's interesting is that the need is determined by the report. That is to say, if it's not being reported, does it need to be?
(I'm jus' bein' an ass.
The answer is always yes, even if she says no. ;) I mean.... what?
If something needs to be reported, then people should hit the report button.
There should be a difference. -1 as people other than you have said is meant to be a simple disagreement with something someone said, which may mean that they're -1ing something that isn't against the CoC. Now on the other hand, if the mods were to have a system where -1ing something was meant to be a signal to mods that something needs to be modded, that would be different. But it can't be both.
Edit: Sorry for "piling on". When I clicked reply, Wrecan and Mudbunny had not yet posted.
There are somethings that should be reported because they are CoC violations, and then there are other things that get reported because someone didn't like it (even if it is not a CoC violation).
A -1 or
That runs counter to everything I've ever observed about human behavior on the internet. People will use the
I haven't noticed people using the
and the report button. Usually it is some silly rant about how person X is wrong and the report button. Although I'm not sure why anyone would respond to a post if they were reporting it.It happens. Had a guy post in a thread that he was gonna report the whole thing. I responded and he then said he was reporting and blocking me. Silly goose, those are CoC violations!
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
If only people would use it appropriately.
The forums can be pretty negative already, we don't need to add an official way to justify it. And the idea that it would save people time by not reading threads that get a lot of -1's, that's silly.
I thought the +/- 1 was for a post, not an entire thread or specific member? As to the "official" negativity. We already have one.
Seriously, what's the purpose of the thumbs down?
That's basically saying most people can't think or judge for themselves. If they start reading something and don't like it, they can stop reading and go on to the next post.
I wish people were as smart as you make them out to be. Seriously, people can stop reading and ignore a post or a specific person, but that doesn't seem to happen very often.
It's like Seeker suggested, +1 is just a way of saying you like something, but have nothing to add.
A -1 could be a way to say that you disagree, but you have nothing to add. It may even be more useful than a +1. Sometimes people dissagree in ways that are not appropriate.
All this talk of posters being able to rate other posters good or bad (Which is what the whole +1/-1 is taking on) is wrong. Posters shouldn't have ANY ability to control another posters rating on the forums. If the person is wrong or whatever, people can judge that for themselves.
I thought the +/- 1 was meant for the posts not the person who made the post. If it is meant as a for of rep, I'd say get rid of the +1. People already get all high and mighty about their post count. Do we really need something else for them to gloat about? And have it be official?
The notion of roving hit squads keepin' the man down is pretty much a fabrication. If your post gets downvoted, it's much more likely to be because your idea is poorly formed, unsupported, and generally ignorant than it is to be because a pack of forum posters has taken it upon themselves to silence any dissent. To assume that that is how it would be used strikes me as paranoia more than anything else.
The notion of roving hit squads keepin' the man down is pretty much a fabrication. If your post gets downvoted, it's much more likely to be because your idea is poorly formed, unsupported, and generally ignorant than it is to be because a pack of forum posters has taken it upon themselves to silence any dissent. To assume that that is how it would be used strikes me as paranoia more than anything else.
If that is the case then people should respond politely to ask them to better form, support and research their point. Down voting it for those reasons can be seen as a form of cyber bullying and/or trolling/baiting.
And mass down vote attacking isn't a fab. I've seen it in action with my own eyes and is done to great effect in forums with decent sized social groups. For instance I'm sure it would have happened a lot during the edition wars.
If a post is just bad beyond repair it is just best to ignore it especially if you think it is beyond the ability of its poster to repair. If you can't respond to it in any positive way then just ignore it because quite frankly being negative to any posters on these boards is generally seen as a no-no and is quite frowned upon. I guess what I'm saying is that if you feel it necessary to down vote a post for any reason then the consequence should be getting banned for bullying/trolling/baiting the poster because generally that all it is.
The notion of roving hit squads keepin' the man down is pretty much a fabrication. If your post gets downvoted, it's much more likely to be because your idea is poorly formed, unsupported, and generally ignorant than it is to be because a pack of forum posters has taken it upon themselves to silence any dissent. To assume that that is how it would be used strikes me as paranoia more than anything else.
If that is the case then people should respond politely to ask them to better form, support and research their point.
And they should respond by politely bettering their form, support, and research of their point. But until they do, why should we not be able to give negative feedback? There's a major difference between giving negative feedback and attacking the poster. The former should be welcomed, the latter prohibited.
You act as if we're dealing with nothing but mature, rational people who just made a mistake resulting in the sort of post I described. That's just not the case - there are many people who consistently repeat baseless claims and allegations that do little more than pollute constructive discussion. Why should the community tolerate them?
And they should respond by politely bettering their form, support, and research of their point. But until they do, why should we not be able to give negative feedback? There's a major difference between giving negative feedback and attacking the poster. The former should be welcomed, the latter prohibited.
You act as if we're dealing with nothing but mature, rational people who just made a mistake resulting in the sort of post I described. That's just not the case - there are many people who consistently repeat baseless claims and allegations that do little more than pollute constructive discussion. Why should the community tolerate them?
Because we have to. We can't respond in kind because of the CoC, and the moderators allow it to go on. Sure, it's cleaned up a bit lately, but it's still there. I think that the people that were getting the rapid suspensions (1 day, 3 days, a few times over the course of a week or two) are behaving a bit better. But for how long?
A -1 removes a lot of the uncivil attacking, and it's only attached to a post, not a poster. In other words, I agree completely with your previous post:
The notion of roving hit squads keepin' the man down is pretty much a fabrication. If your post gets downvoted, it's much more likely to be because your idea is poorly formed, unsupported, and generally ignorant than it is to be because a pack of forum posters has taken it upon themselves to silence any dissent. To assume that that is how it would be used strikes me as paranoia more than anything else.
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
What? Really? They changed that?
(goes to check the CoC)
Nope. Sorry. Section 3 is still there. And as it's pretty easy to say "that person is causing me discomfort because I don't like the sound of the voice I've assigned them"...
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
What? Really? They changed that?
(goes to check the CoC)
Nope. Sorry. Section 3 is still there. And as it's pretty easy to say "that person is causing me discomfort because I don't like the sound of the voice I've assigned them"...
The +1 button would be like a facebook like button (but please without the facebook or twitter or whatever else becomes the current rage). It would let someone know you like their post (people could see who liked each post) without wasting a post just to say so.
The -1 button would be be similar, but the additional functionality I suggested would help it serve an additional purpose. Each user could set a threshold for what rating they want to see (so I could say anything rated -3 or below I want hidden, but someone else might set the bar at -5 or just not set the filter at all). Kind of like the current block feature, it the post would be collapsed, but someone could choose to manually expand it and view it normally. Basically like the way the comment section works on yahoo news. It might cause people to express themselves better or more politely (and allow those who want to to be able to ignore the more negative posts) while anyone that feels the ratings are too unfair or wants to see everything anyway is still able to do so.
Instead of having a global +/-1, have the +1 be global/local and the -1 be solely local.
By that I mean that the +1s that you apply go both the the forums ("look, some random person on the intartubeez likes this post") as well as on a local setting ("This person says good things"). The -1, OTOH, goes towards local only ("99% of what this person posts is image macros.").
Then each person sets their threshold. When a post is below the set threshold, it is automagically minimized. One possibility with this is that if someone whom you have downvoted on your personal list post something that a lot of people find well-written and that a lot of people have upvoted, then it could be bumped above your threshold so that you could see that and decide to maybe give poster X a second chance. (There would, of course, still be the ignore feature if you are *certain* that you don't want to read what soemone is posting.)
Edit to add - A downvote should not be uised in place of a report button. The two have very different purposes and shouldn't be mixed.
My suggestion had nothing to do with a rep system. All I was refering to was a post by post basis +1 / -1. The +1 / -1 attaches to the post. NOT THE POSTER.
All this talk of a rep system is just muddling up a already muddled forum. Do not want.
I agree!
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
If only people would use it appropriately.
Just because you report a post, doesn't mean the Orcs are going to see it the way you do.
The forums can be pretty negative already, we don't need to add an official way to justify it. And the idea that it would save people time by not reading threads that get a lot of -1's, that's silly.
I thought the +/- 1 was for a post, not an entire thread or specific member? As to the "official" negativity. We already have one.
Seriously, what's the purpose of the thumbs down?
The idea was to be able to say you agree with what someone posted without having to make a whole post, and take up screen space, if you didn't have anything to add.
What others have suggested takes it farther then that, where if a post has to many -1s it becomes invisible, and you can set when that happens for you. Thats when you have groups of people coming together and crapping on a post/thread simply to hide it because they don't like the person.
That's basically saying most people can't think or judge for themselves. If they start reading something and don't like it, they can stop reading and go on to the next post.
I wish people were as smart as you make them out to be. Seriously, people can stop reading and ignore a post or a specific person, but that doesn't seem to happen very often.
If you think the worst of people, chances are you look for reasons to justify your view. The more you dislike some one, the more you turn everything into that proof. That's just how people are.
I personaly would rather spend my life thinking people are better and find myself dissapointed at times, then spend my life always trying to confirm how horrible people are. It's like being around someone that is miserable all the time. It's not enough they are miserable, but they have to make sure everyone else knows just how miserable they are, and that everyone understands why they are so miserable, and then get everyone to tell them they are justified for feeling that miserable all the time. No thanks, I've got better things to do.
It's like Seeker suggested, +1 is just a way of saying you like something, but have nothing to add.
A -1 could be a way to say that you disagree, but you have nothing to add. It may even be more useful than a +1. Sometimes people dissagree in ways that are not appropriate.
If it would be just that. But again, here's what would start to happen, people would us the amount of -1s to tell that person to shut up, and that no one agrees or likes their idea. Sure, the post isn't hidden and it doesn't effect the posters ability to post, but it will have an effect.
And again, people could dogpile a post with -1s just to get back at the person, so they can then feel justified in telling the person to go away or shut up because they didn't like them.
All this talk of posters being able to rate other posters good or bad (Which is what the whole +1/-1 is taking on) is wrong. Posters shouldn't have ANY ability to control another posters rating on the forums. If the person is wrong or whatever, people can judge that for themselves.
I thought the +/- 1 was meant for the posts not the person who made the post. If it is meant as a for of rep, I'd say get rid of the +1. People already get all high and mighty about their post count. Do we really need something else for them to gloat about? And have it be official?
The original idea put forth for the +1 was as you are saying. Just so you can agree when you don't have anything to add.
People have tried to add on to it as a way to rate other posters and to hide those posts that aren't popular. That we don't need, and you are right people already use thier post count and join date, we don't need another official way to be jerky, do we.
Wow I didn't think the idea would spark this much discussion. Ok here's my thoughts.
The +1 button would be like a facebook like button (but please without the facebook or twitter or whatever else becomes the current rage). It would let someone know you like their post (people could see who liked each post) without wasting a post just to say so.
The -1 button would be be similar, but the additional functionality I suggested would help it serve an additional purpose. Each user could set a threshold for what rating they want to see (so I could say anything rated -3 or below I want hidden, but someone else might set the bar at -5 or just not set the filter at all). Kind of like the current block feature, it the post would be collapsed, but someone could choose to manually expand it and view it normally. Basically like the way the comment section works on yahoo news. It might cause people to express themselves better or more politely (and allow those who want to to be able to ignore the more negative posts) while anyone that feels the ratings are too unfair or wants to see everything anyway is still able to do so.
It might cause people to express themselves better, but chances are, people would use it to gang up on other people simply to hide thier posts. But in general, people don't seem to like artificial ways to modifier their behavior to a standard that is considered acceptable.
Take these recent threads for example. Many of us feel that the CoC besides being vague, are applied unevenly. The warnings and bans don't really seem to make any difference, do they? No one gets booted for good do they?
The only poster I know who got kicked for good was for continually encouraging people to try and violate WoTC copyright.
Facebook has never given in to demands for a dislike button and it clearly hasn't hurt them.
If it's just like/dislike or agree/disagree I don't see to much of a problem, other then people coming and saying, See, no one likes your ideas/post you should just go away. And to solve that, WoTC simply needs to say that every time someone says that to another poster, it's an automatic 3 day ban.
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
If only people would use it appropriately.
Just because you report a post, doesn't mean the Orcs are going to see it the way you do.
Ah, how I wish I still had those rose-colored glasses of the halcyon bygone days of yore.
Don't you remember that Trevor and Monkey said that ORCs err on the side of caution?
The report button is for when something violates the CoC, not because you don't like someone or what they said.
If only people would use it appropriately.
Just because you report a post, doesn't mean the Orcs are going to see it the way you do.
Ah, how I wish I still had those rose-colored glasses of the halcyon bygone days of yore.
Don't you remember that Trevor and Monkey said that ORCs err on the side of caution?
I dunno, I've reported posts that have not been edited or deleted or anything done. So, yeah, the Orcs don't always see things the way the reporter does.
Just because you report a post, doesn't mean the Orcs are going to see it the way you do.
Depends on how you word your report. Section 3 is pretty open to that.:
3. Do not harass, bully, threaten, harm or cause discomfort for other persons, including any other members.
And as Draco pointed out, ORCs are supposed to err on the side of caution.
The idea was to be able to say you agree with what someone posted without having to make a whole post, and take up screen space, if you didn't have anything to add.
What others have suggested takes it farther then that, where if a post has to many -1s it becomes invisible, and you can set when that happens for you. Thats when you have groups of people coming together and crapping on a post/thread simply to hide it because they don't like the person.
People can suggest whatever they want. It doesn't mean it's going to happen. Seriously, if they can add a +1 that only applies to a single post, why can't they add a -1 that only applies to single post and does nothing else but rate the post? It's simple, it does affecct whether or not people can see the post, and it has nothing to do with member rep.
If you think the worst of people, chances are you look for reasons to justify your view. The more you dislike some one, the more you turn everything into that proof. That's just how people are.
I personaly would rather spend my life thinking people are better and find myself dissapointed at times, then spend my life always trying to confirm how horrible people are. It's like being around someone that is miserable all the time. It's not enough they are miserable, but they have to make sure everyone else knows just how miserable they are, and that everyone understands why they are so miserable, and then get everyone to tell them they are justified for feeling that miserable all the time. No thanks, I've got better things to do.
Odd. This seems to be contradicted by this:
If it would be just that. But again, here's what would start to happen, people would us the amount of -1s to tell that person to shut up, and that no one agrees or likes their idea. Sure, the post isn't hidden and it doesn't effect the posters ability to post, but it will have an effect.
And again, people could dogpile a post with -1s just to get back at the person, so they can then feel justified in telling the person to go away or shut up because they didn't like them.
The original idea put forth for the +1 was as you are saying. Just so you can agree when you don't have anything to add.
People have tried to add on to it as a way to rate other posters and to hide those posts that aren't popular. That we don't need, and you are right people already use thier post count and join date, we don't need another official way to be jerky, do we.
If people can't handle a -1 because they wil somehow use it for evil against other mmbers, what makes you think they won't use the +1 to gloat and be jerks about it? Might as well scrap the whole +1 idea as well.
I dunno, I've reported posts that have not been edited or deleted or anything done. So, yeah, the Orcs don't always see things the way the reporter does.
Have you gotten the confirmation email CS sends out when you report something? I try not to report posts unless it's something like advertising. Sometimes I don't get the confirmation auto-response and the post stays up. I'm guessing it get to an ORC in such cases.
And no, it won't "hurt" the forums not to have it. Hurting implies that it would be worse than it is now, and it currently does not have a feature, so continuing not to have it doesn't hurt anything. Anyway, it's just a suggestion, not an idea I'm particularly invested in.
The notion of roving hit squads keepin' the man down is pretty much a fabrication. If your post gets downvoted, it's much more likely to be because your idea is poorly formed, unsupported, and generally ignorant than it is to be because a pack of forum posters has taken it upon themselves to silence any dissent. To assume that that is how it would be used strikes me as paranoia more than anything else.
If that is the case then people should respond politely to ask them to better form, support and research their point.
And they should respond by politely bettering their form, support, and research of their point. But until they do, why should we not be able to give negative feedback? There's a major difference between giving negative feedback and attacking the poster. The former should be welcomed, the latter prohibited.
You act as if we're dealing with nothing but mature, rational people who just made a mistake resulting in the sort of post I described. That's just not the case - there are many people who consistently repeat baseless claims and allegations that do little more than pollute constructive discussion. Why should the community tolerate them?
It is possible to disagree and be helpful to other posters without being negative. Negative feedback isn't necessary if you don't think their post is too poorly formed, supported or researched to respond to. Yes there is a different between negative feedback and attacking a poster but often they're interpreted the same by the receiver. Even with verbal and body ques that these boards can't really provide. More often then not negative feed back causes one to become defensive. Easy way to start flaming and trolling.
Just stick to being positive and/or nice/polite. If you can't then just avoid responding.
And no I'm not acting as if we're dealing with only mature, rational people. If I was then I'd be fine with a -1 because pretty much nobody would every be offended by it and nobody would ever seek to abuse it. I'm acting as if people have the capability of regularly being childish, immature, selfish and vengeful and so erring on the side of caution.
If someone is basically, more or less, going to be a troll then just don't respond. There is no reason to keep giving them "negative feedback" or down voting all their posts that are "poorly formed, supported or researched" because it will just cause them to continue and thus keep them polluting discussion. If you can't refrain from interacting with them then block them. If they are truly a problem then likely they are doing something they shouldn't be doing and probably should be reported for their actions. If they aren't violating the CoC then for whatever reason you decided to have a problem with another poster that you should probably deal with using one of the methods I discussed above.
I think you're reading too much into it with the ideas of people "ganging up" to -1 posts. If each person has their own settings on what constitutes a low enough rating to hide a post, and some posters will disable it entirely, then the -1s are only as effective as people choose to make them. And again, if you want to see someone's post even if it was collapsed, you just click on it to expand it. It would be a sort of self-filter but based on the post rating rather than a poster rating (which you can already use the block function for).
And no, it won't "hurt" the forums not to have it. Hurting implies that it would be worse than it is now, and it currently does not have a feature, so continuing not to have it doesn't hurt anything. Anyway, it's just a suggestion, not an idea I'm particularly invested in.
people already do gang up, so I'm not really reading to much into it.
Also, there's no good reason to hide a post simply because others didn't like it. You are basically forcing group opinion on others. Sure, people would also have the choice to never block low ratings. That doesn't mean it's good for the forums.
Odd. This seems to be contradicted by this:
I can easily see that. But for me, and this is just how I see things.
There is a difference accepting human nature, and assigning a trait (like intelligence) that is subjective from a personal point of view.
What I might consider stupid, you don't.
For example, I think the internet makes more people honest. Unfortunitly what it makes them more honest about can often be what they are really like, and sometimes unfortunitly, it's not very pleasent what they are really alike when they don't have the reality of a person in front of them.
Also, there's no good reason to hide a post simply because others didn't like it. You are basically forcing group opinion on others. Sure, people would also have the choice to never block low ratings. That doesn't mean it's good for the forums.
Well since it would be based entirely on user preferences, it's kind of hard to argue that group opinion is being forced on anyone. And whether or not there is good reason to hide a post based on the views of others might vary from person to person, hence why it would be individualized settings.
Does that mean it's good for the forums? Not necessarily. I don't know if it's good or bad. I just saw the mention of a -1 button and thought that if they do decide to implement it (which they might not as you and others have made some good points as to why that's just not necessary) then they should also implement this feature that could make some use of it.
Also, there's no good reason to hide a post simply because others didn't like it. You are basically forcing group opinion on others. Sure, people would also have the choice to never block low ratings. That doesn't mean it's good for the forums.
Well since it would be based entirely on user preferences, it's kind of hard to argue that group opinion is being forced on anyone. And whether or not there is good reason to hide a post based on the views of others might vary from person to person, hence why it would be individualized settings.
Does that mean it's good for the forums? Not necessarily. I don't know if it's good or bad. I just saw the mention of a -1 button and thought that if they do decide to implement it (which they might not as you and others have made some good points as to why that's just not necessary) then they should also implement this feature that could make some use of it.
What would be the purpose of being able to automatically not see posts with enough dislikes from other posters, as determined by each poster as to what that amount is?
What is it meant to accomplish?
What would be the purpose of being able to automatically not see posts with enough dislikes from other posters, as determined by each poster as to what that amount is?
What is it meant to accomplish?
It is meant to allow some people to allow the community to act as a filter and to let others not allow it. I got the idea from the comments section on yahoo where some most of the truly ridiculous comments were hidden due to negative ratings, but you could choose to view them anyway. The difference would be that in this case the threshold is set by the user, and some users wouldn't trust the community to act as a filter.
Now yes, logically you could simply ignore posts that you don't like. But logic doesn't always apply to human behavior. By that thought process, we don't need a block button either because you can always ignore posters that you don't like and choose not to read their stuff or respond to them. Some hot-headed individuals may find that this reduces the number of posts that get them fired up, particularly if they are frequenting forums of like-minded individuals. For example, a diehard 3e supporter that constantly pops into 4e General probably won't get much benefit from this, but then again if this person hates 4e he might just be in there because he is looking for an argument anyway (this is just an example, not targeting anyone specific). On the other hand, a diehard 4e player that is tired of seeing the "3e does this better" bait threads may find that a lot of the threads he usually gets upset over are now filtered and he no longer feels the need to jump in and play the part of the 4venger.
But like I said, it only makes sense IF a -1 button is included and there are very valid reasons for not doing so.
Odd. This seems to be contradicted by this:
I can easily see that. But for me, and this is just how I see things.
There is a difference accepting human nature, and assigning a trait (like intelligence) that is subjective from a personal point of view.
What I might consider stupid, you don't.
For example, I think the internet makes more people honest. Unfortunitly what it makes them more honest about can often be what they are really like, and sometimes unfortunitly, it's not very pleasent what they are really alike when they don't have the reality of a person in front of them.
How about we agree to disagree and leave it at that? While this is certainly an interesting conversation, I think we are going way off topic. I don't think the point of this thread was to debate the usefulness, or lack-there-of, of specific suggestion.
Odd. This seems to be contradicted by this:
I can easily see that. But for me, and this is just how I see things.
There is a difference accepting human nature, and assigning a trait (like intelligence) that is subjective from a personal point of view.
What I might consider stupid, you don't.
For example, I think the internet makes more people honest. Unfortunitly what it makes them more honest about can often be what they are really like, and sometimes unfortunitly, it's not very pleasent what they are really alike when they don't have the reality of a person in front of them.
How about we agree to disagree and leave it at that? While this is certainly an interesting conversation, I think we are going way off topic. I don't think the point of this thread was to debate the usefulness, or lack-there-of, of specific suggestion.
I wasn't trying to get you to agree to anything. I explained my personal view on things, and I made it very clear that they were just that.
Discussing human nature is off topic, but discussing the value of features within topic, providing it doesn't come down to personal attacks and such.
It gives them a better view of why we would want such features.
It gives them a better view of why we would want such features.
Exactly.
What would be the purpose of being able to automatically not see posts with enough dislikes from other posters, as determined by each poster as to what that amount is?
What is it meant to accomplish?
It is meant to allow some people to allow the community to act as a filter and to let others not allow it. I got the idea from the comments section on yahoo where some most of the truly ridiculous comments were hidden due to negative ratings, but you could choose to view them anyway. The difference would be that in this case the threshold is set by the user, and some users wouldn't trust the community to act as a filter.
Now yes, logically you could simply ignore posts that you don't like. But logic doesn't always apply to human behavior. By that thought process, we don't need a block button either because you can always ignore posters that you don't like and choose not to read their stuff or respond to them. Some hot-headed individuals may find that this reduces the number of posts that get them fired up, particularly if they are frequenting forums of like-minded individuals. For example, a diehard 3e supporter that constantly pops into 4e General probably won't get much benefit from this, but then again if this person hates 4e he might just be in there because he is looking for an argument anyway (this is just an example, not targeting anyone specific). On the other hand, a diehard 4e player that is tired of seeing the "3e does this better" bait threads may find that a lot of the threads he usually gets upset over are now filtered and he no longer feels the need to jump in and play the part of the 4venger.
But like I said, it only makes sense IF a -1 button is included and there are very valid reasons for not doing so.
Your right, currently block is rather usless, because of the fact you still know the person posted, and you don't even have to take them off block to see what they posted, you can simply hit quote.
There are already people who make it a point to mention who they have on block and then continue to read those posters. Which means they are trolling those posts looking for something to pick apart, or to reply in hopes of pushing buttons. And chances are, those people are going to break the CoC in their response, because at that point, it's becoming personal.
So, how is a feature that uses public opinion to hide posts going to be useful if you can bypass it any time you want?
Basically, you are saying you are ok with having others have a say on what you can see or not, if you use the feature you suggest. And if you find yourself bypassing your settings a lot, then what's the point? Are you looking for something to pick apart in those hidden posts?
If anything, posts that have to many dislikes, are going to draw more attention, because that's our nature as well. Much like how road accidents cause people to slow down to catch a glimpse of what happened.
And of those that "just take a look" how many are going to want to say something? Probaly enough where it's going to end up derailing the thread, because it becomes about that poster then the subject.
Like/dislike that doesn't do anything then let someone know how they feel about a post that doesn't do anything is, sure. When it starts having a public opinion effect, no. And certain if it's done where you can opt to always take a peek, then it's even more useless.
Odd. This seems to be contradicted by this:
I can easily see that. But for me, and this is just how I see things.
There is a difference accepting human nature, and assigning a trait (like intelligence) that is subjective from a personal point of view.
What I might consider stupid, you don't.
For example, I think the internet makes more people honest. Unfortunitly what it makes them more honest about can often be what they are really like, and sometimes unfortunitly, it's not very pleasent what they are really alike when they don't have the reality of a person in front of them.
How about we agree to disagree and leave it at that? While this is certainly an interesting conversation, I think we are going way off topic. I don't think the point of this thread was to debate the usefulness, or lack-there-of, of specific suggestion.
I wasn't trying to get you to agree to anything. I explained my personal view on things, and I made it very clear that they were just that.
Discussing human nature is off topic, but discussing the value of features within topic, providing it doesn't come down to personal attacks and such.
It gives them a better view of why we would want such features.
We have already established why a +/- 1 would be good/bad. Continuing to debate it is about as useful as running face first into a wall.
It's wish list time.
If you were in charge of this community, what would you want to see added to Onesite's tools and functions? (We're talking here about these forums plus the blogs, groups, and wikis, but not the D&D Character Builder, Compendium, or Adventure Tools. Those are completely separate from Onesite.)
Steve
Wow, better advertising for a start! Just stumbled onto this thread
Wish list and general comments
1) Forums: Word processor: it's very clunky and I wish it was better. Better word wrap, better default font size (it's a pain having to change it each and every time). Improve its ability to handle pasted text, for example pasting from the compendium causes a formatting headache. I wish each forum post had an edit timestamp, so you could see if a post was edited and by whom.
2) Forums: Organisation: I wish there were less forums, and that each forum was linked to all the others with a clickable link/graphic somewhere in a frame or sidebar.
3) Forums: Play-by-post. I wish there was a dice roller function! Nothing fancy, mind you.
4) Blogs/wikis: These work fine; I wish there was a way to quickly scan for new blogs (maybe there is a way, but I haven't figured it out. Prolly a good thing, don't really have the time to read more blogs ;)
5) Groups: Groups are awful to navigatel without using Bookmarks as the workaround. I wish there was a way to have your Groups just listed always on your screen when you are logged in, and you just click the link/graphic to go there.
I wish there was a way to quickly scan for new blogs (maybe there is a way, but I haven't figured it out.
On the first of each month, I always post a blog article called Heroes of Blogging in which I single out blogs of note. (Here's the one from July.) That article also has a link so you can see a list of just the recent articles by Featured Bloggers and recent articles by Staff Bloggers. In fact, I just gave out my First Annual HoBby Awards for outstanding bloggers of the past year.
- Thread redirects--when a thread is moved, it should be possible to leave behind a redirect to the thread's new location. It should be possible for redirects to be made either temporary or permanent.
- Forum redirects--the ability to list a forum in one section when it's actually located in another, the way the Rec-Room, Gamer Classifieds, and the Marketplace used to be linked to from all over. Bonus points if you can redirect to a group's forum.
- The ability to move threads between groups and the regular forums, and from group to group.
- The ability to move individual posts between threads, or to move posts to an new thread from an existing one.
- [indent][/indent] BBCode tags.
- The ability to preview private messages.
- The ability to send a private message to more than one non-friend user at once.
Next, incremental improvements to the OneSite software:
- The ability to create anchors within a post, and links to those anchors. (The current anchor-insertion button doesn't work.)
- A method for providing in-forum incentives to be used as prizes in community-based contents and games. CAs and CTs were used for this purpose under the old system, but the former's no longer viable, so I'd recommend CTs and Badges. (Ever played Neopets? Their trophy system is fantastic.)
- The ability for a group owner/moderator to blacklist specific users from an otherwise open group.
- A dice roller.
- A reference system for trading.
Next, major overhaul issues:
- Redesign groups to be more "push" than "pull". Currently participating in groups requires a user to cumbersomely navigate from the forums to the group and from group to group, making it all but impossible for them to participate in more than one or two and decreasing their desire to do so. Find a way to bring all the necessary information from the user's groups to the user in one central, easy-to-navigate hub that allows access to all points at once, much the way the User CP acted in vBulletin.
- Improve subscriptions. Remember how subscriptions worked in vBulletin? Like that. Allow forum subscriptions, too. (This could be part of the above.)
Lastly, personal pet peeves:
- Remove the button for the ugly smilies that came with the software. The new ones are much better, but a bunch of people don't use them because the button for the ugly ones is the one more immediately recognizable as being for smilies.
- Correct the spoiler tags; they're supposed to black out text so it can't be read unless highlighted, but instead they do the exact same thing that the sblock tags do.
- Remove the ugly default smilies from the 'mood' dropdown on one's profile and replace them with the good smilies.
This thread is supposed to be for suggestions. Make your suggestions and move on.
Can I +1 this post?
Can I +1 this post?
Not until we get such a feature.
[list][*]Redesign groups to be more "push" than "pull". Currently participating in groups requires a user to cumbersomely navigate from the forums to the group and from group to group, making it all but impossible for them to participate in more than one or two and decreasing their desire to do so. Find a way to bring all the necessary information from the user's groups to the user in one central, easy-to-navigate hub that allows access to all points at once, much the way the User CP acted in vBulletin.
+1
1. Can there be a preview button? I don't want to have to send something just to make sure the formatting works.
2. Can there be a "quote to pm" option? Sometimes someone says something I want to respond to but I don't want to take the conversation off topic.
3. The ajax is kind of wonky on PMs. I noticed, for instance, that it doesn't mark a message as having been read unless I close the message in a very specific way. If I use my browser's back button it doesn't mark the message as read which is kind of annoying.
4. PMs seem to still have the old style newline formatting which is inconsistent with the rest of the forums and annoying.
I'd like it if the preferences link wasn't hiding in plain sight, because getting to and editing signatures is a headache for new users. Put the option to edit your sig under the Profile Tab for Pete's sake!
This^^^. I couldn't figure out for the life of me how to create a sig until I finally asked another poster.
I support these:
There is no notification of posts being modded within the post. Such as I can edit one of my posts all I want and there is no notification within the post to ever hint to it being edited and especially as to when it had been edited. It seems silly but to me this is something that can be a bit important. Editing and accusations can be used in arguments of all things. I find it important as well for other reasons and whatnot.
Also if I am not mistaken I could delete my posts and there would be no notice of the post being deleted. Basically to all users viewing the thread they would have no knowledge that a post existed if they hadn't previously read it.
What I think should be implemented is a notice at the bottom of edited posts as to when the post was edited/modded and by whom. I also think there should be an option for a little note as to why it was edited or modded.
A similar thing should be available for a person deleting their own post. There should be at least a 1 line notification where the post existed within the thread letting people know that the post in that place within the thread had been deleted by its user. A date and time of the delete would be nice as well. I think it would also be fair for the person to leave a note as to why they deleted it.
This should be able to help out with any discontinuity created in a thread caused by self modding by at least letting viewers know that some content had been later added or removed from the conversation.
Please revive RPG Gamer Classifieds...place it within the D&D forums list. Apparently no one knows it exits. Last post was like 2 years ago...
Yes, please. It's almost impossible to find unless someone who already knows about it shows it to you. And it leads to countless LFG threads being placed in random forums by people that don't know any better while the threads in the proper forum get ignored.
What I think should be implemented is a notice at the bottom of edited posts as to when the post was edited/modded and by whom. I also think there should be an option for a little note as to why it was edited or modded.
A similar thing should be available for a person deleting their own post. There should be at least a 1 line notification where the post existed within the thread letting people know that the post in that place within the thread had been deleted by its user. A date and time of the delete would be nice as well. I think it would also be fair for the person to leave a note as to why they deleted it.
Please revive RPG Gamer Classifieds...place it within the D&D forums list. Apparently no one knows it exits. Last post was like 2 years ago...
to both of theseWhat I'd like about this ability is if the OP got an option to make a statement or last post as part of their locking option which would server as a notice as to why they locked their thread. Maybe it is because they feel their question was answered, they feel the thread is too off topic or maybe they want to put it into a period of cool down before things get so bad that ORCs shut it down permanently. Things like this could maybe help lower work load for ORCs, however like most things I'm sure some people would find ways to abuse this in some sort of negative and trollish way.
_________________
*I would assume they'd only be able to unlock their thread if they where the ones to lock it instead of an ORC.
I'm more cool with allowing the OP to be able to lock/unlock* their own thread than giving them the ability to delete, mod and ban users from the thread. I guess the reason why is that they're not really being a dictator within their own thread/topic. Or at least don't have that ability. They can just close the thread if they feel things have gotten a bit out of hand and whatnot.
What I'd like about this ability is if the OP got an option to make a statement or last post as part of their locking option which would server as a notice as to why they locked their thread. Maybe it is because they feel their question was answered, they feel the thread is too off topic or maybe they want to put it into a period of cool down before things get so bad that ORCs shut it down permanently. Things like this could maybe help lower work load for ORCs, however like most things I'm sure some people would find ways to abuse this in some sort of negative and trollish way.
_________________
*I would assume they'd only be able to unlock their thread if they where the ones to lock it instead of an ORC.
This is exactly what I meant; df was able to say it better than I.
His footnote is part of what I meant by the "override control", although I was also including ORCs having the ability to re-open an OP-locked thread if necessary.
Here's my big thank-you to everyone who contributed. Your suggestions have been invaluable.
Steve