Hai guise,
I'm gonna start off by saying I'm not trying to piss anyone off or annoy anyone, but I'm noticing this strange pattern and I catch myself doing it every now and then too.
I remember when 4th was announced people whined about it before they even got a glance at it. "3.5 is fine! Why do we need 4th?!" I agreed, 3.5 was fine although our party was suffering from serious balancing issues, 3.5 was open for so much tweaking and variants, it was perfectly capable or stablising itself. But wasn't that the point? 3.5 was done. How many books are there? At least 80 3.5 books, not to mentioned the total 3E which I think is about 300 or something? I'm just guessing, but it's not like we NEEDED new books.
4th was released, it's very new and different and some love it, some don't, but it doesn't change a thing. 3.5 didn't need new material and 4th was just the way for WotC to continue D&D without trouble.
Now, I didn't check the forums when WotC went to Gleemax, but I'm sure there was whining. Now, there's whining about this forum. Not just the general "Meh, it works but it could be better, it's not much of an upgrade" but actual "I hate it!" "This sucks!".
Is anyone else noticing this pattern? And can someone please tell these people to just count to 10 for a change? Rationality comes a long way and other than the double-enter thing, I haven't really noticed anything annoying about the new forums.
Just count to 10 people. Be patient and be glad WotC provides all this. Even for previous editions there are still places to go.
Cheers and seriously, don't get pissed 
Peter aka Ekkoe
EDIT: Ironically, I had to fix some double-enters ;)
I have noticed it. It annoys me.
I sometimes moan about things, but I've just logged on here and the forums are fine, the blog bits etc are less useful to me, but nicely done. I like the background.
Will it change my life? No. Is it better than before? Possibly.
I will moan about the fact that my computer only displays half of the screen.
I love roleplaying. Editions are less important than getting together with friends to make stuff up that doesn't really matter and allows me to escape pressures for a few hours.
So yeah. Stop moaning and enjoy the free platform provided by Wizards and the games we love.
Yeah, I noticed the whining as well about the forums. Some of these people get really worked up about not having the forums exactly how they like it. In some ways I want to say, "Stop crying and take your thumb out of your mouth." But, hey, there's all kinds of people and you just got to deal with it I guess. These people just need to remember that this is still in beta and WOTC can very well change the format around to better suit the users.
About the whining dealing with the editions. People like what they are use to. I understand that. I look at it though as a privilege that other people are taking the time to build these gaming systems and material. I didn't have to do any work, I just choose to buy it or not. And that's the big point, choose. If these people don't like the system, then move on to something else. They can use 3.5, 2nd edition, or take the time to make their own. Also there's other systems out there like Castles & Crusades.
Anyway, it would just be really nice if we all just calm down and rationally talk about what we'd like to accomplish and get out of our gaming experience. More would get done that way.
Have you ever heard of the saying: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?"
The reason people whine, is because they were happy with what they had. Some of us adjust, out of necessity. Because we still value what we have, even if we've lost some things. But you know, I do wonder why change can't be additive and/or constructive? Why can't you add blogs, wikis, groups... without compromising the forums people had before? Because it does really seem like the forum aspect of this site, was better before this upgrade.
Unfortunately there are certain things with this "improvement" that are at the heart of it (the very idea of it in a way) and they will not be changed no matter how we ask.
Not all of us want to be in groupsies. Not all of us want to be facebookies.
"But you can still just visit the forums, those are extra features, just ignore them or turn them off".
You see, this was a forum when we created our accounts. And now this is an account in a social networking site. And we can't delete our accounts.
Worse or different? Some people have a hard time telling these two apart. Now, these new forums have their problems, but given some time for the developers to react to peoples suggestions and constructive criticisms (rather then people just saying "this sucks"), I'm sure many of these problems can and will be fixed. Again, it comes down to the difference between offering advice, concerns and constructive criticism vs whinning and moaning and just being generally unpleasent.
These people are supposed to be professionals who build social networking sites. You have to be ragingly incompetant to think these forums are acceptable. All you have to do is look at any other forum.
The old boards never had alternating colours, I don't see why suddenly it is a requirement in order for this to be a good forum. Yes, the colour scheme needs to be changed away from retina scorching white, but alternating colours? can you really not tell where one poster ends and the next begins by the big grey line containing the date and time posted, the various buttons to interact with the following thread and then the name and icon of the poster... just like the old threads?
The gray line isn't good enough. Its not visible enough, for one thing; if it was a big dark gray or blue box, that'd be one thing, but as-is, its not immediately obvious. Alternating colors are much better, and are pretty standard.
As to the paragraph spacing... wow, picky. Maybe the spacing is a little big (though the old forums had no spacing unless the poster put in extra's manually, which was even worse), but it's hardly a reason for the boards to "suck", or even to contribute.
Its obnoxious to read, and given that is what you do on forums...
To be fair, the old boards did this same thing too (if you ever scrolled down to the 4E errata you'd have seen it), the only difference is the top level thread. Where here the top level thread contains community, fundamentals, etc, the old one only used those as headers and had the (what are now) subthreads as the top level. Now, if you click on DnD fundamentals, it will space all the sub threads apart as it used to be on the old boards (order is off though).
Given how often I posted on the errata forums, I'm well aware of that.
I've got to ask, do you believe this is something they are incapable of bring back, or just something they forgot or didn't think to implement? Given you even admit that it's a feature typically available to a lot of sites, it is unlikely that it was not available, therefore, it is likely just something that was neglected by the WotC staff, who typically didn't need to look at the threads content after they'd decided to post "this thread is locked" or "be nice". So do you really want to argue that the new forums "suck", simply because of a feature that likely can and will be re-implemented before it's Beta phase is over? or do you think it might be, just maybe, a little more productive to stop moaning and condemning the new site that hasn't even been active for 2 full days, and instead offer your concerns as constructive criticisms and advice (Just an FYI "it sucks because..." is nether constructive, nor providing advice. It is attacking. I know I know, the old boards were rife with “this sucks” and “that’s useless” comments, but that never made them right.)
It doesn't matter if they forgot it or didn't think to implement it - only an incompetent would not put in such a feature. Its completely standard on forums. These people, again, are supposed to be professionals, and when they make the actual forum part worse, then they should never work in this industry. Heck, most forums now allow you to make a quick response without even changing pages, and this forum doesn't incorporate that feature either. Its not like the Wotc folks don't use forums. This is on the people they hired to do the new community site.
Yes, I want to argue that the new forums suck because they are worse than the old forums for what you actually use a forum for, and they will continue to be worse until they have at least:
1) Much more visible post demarcation.
2) A different color scheme.
3) The ability to read the thread while you respond to it.
4) Put the buttons to quote and edit posts down at the bottom of the post, where they belong.
5) Bring back quick response.
This was posted:
"Yes, the forums unfortunately took a bit of a hit as far as features and looks go. We're working on restoring the functionality you're used to as soon as possible, but we didn't want to have to keep the forums down another few weeks to do it--going live as-is and having at least something for you guys to use was seen as a better option than waiting however many weeks or months it would take to make everything perfect before letting you in. Rest assured that the techs are working hard at restoring the features we know you miss."
Don't know if you read it.
That's funny. The 'techs' are really just 'the tech that is also working on the DDI programs' they really need to use some of their cash income almost 40k per month of DDI subscriptions to pay for a decent sized team to deal with these issues. Also why not have the old forums, and beta the new forums AT THE SAME TIME? Seriously their developers, project managers, and management personell need to pick up some classes and/or books on how effective development processes work.
Wasn't Gleemax an attempt at social networking for gamers? And what happened to Gleemax?
This history lesson brought to you by OTTo the OTTer.
By the way what does "OTTer" stand for anyway? Also I agree completely. WotC just doesn't seem to learn its lessons. They must not have reliable personnel or something in key positions (management).
I am thus far enjoying this BETA. It is obviously going to have it's problems, seeing as how it is BETA. I am fairly certain the forums are going to be just as functional as ever, you shouldn't expect every little thing to work perfectly when it is BETA.
There is a difference between whining and criticism, though. In beta you are supposed to find problems and report them. Endless threads of whining will not do this job. Contact customer service so that when this BETA is over they know what they need to implement or drop.
Actually they are calling this a BETA and it is really a Pre-Alpha so our 'whining' is actually justified. See BETA implies that something has all of the features and most of the 'deal-breaker' bugs worked out since most of the posts are pretty much saying if they don't change certain 'features', or as us non-corporate talkers call them, bugs are not fixed or removed they will not come back. In other words many many deal-breakers are here.
There are only 1 or two positive things I can say about this change. I like not having to log-in twice. The quoting system now keeps imbedded quotes (the lack of which was a pain on the old forums). Other than that all I'm seeing is another attempt by WotC to fail at their business and get a 'free' bail out from the gov't.
The new forums are horrible.
Period.
Case closed.
Ciao!
Actually, there is no peroid, and the case is most certainly not closed, because there are some people who actually like the new forums, myself being one of them. Don't think you can speak for the entire community.
Ahhh!
My man Sam!
Good to see you buddy!!!
Sorry you like the new style, but I think it is horrible and hard to work with... but I am glad we seem to be our old selves again...
Why don't we start a poll to see just how many people like it versus how many people don't like it?
Because counting and basic math are against the CoC/ToU or whatever it is now (what is it now anyway?). Besides WotC doesn't want to know about real number, just check out their last poll on the GT vs. ATs.
When people say "this sucks" replace it in your mind with "the design of this forum is not effective and is not user friendly, many of the problems should have been sorted out in the design phase, but weren't, therefore if things don't change I'm going to another forum that is easier to use" and you'll get the general jist of what is going on.
I have now. Thanks for that.Wasn't sure I was going to be able to recover even part of my old account, but that early awkwardness seems over now.
This place certainly looks odd ... at least for the moment. I'll not whine -- I'm too old now for the standard whines, yet not old enough for the classic whines of the aged.
Frankly, I thought this place would be down until September.
Honestly, I think it was a foolhardy decision to go live before september. I'd rather have waited than this arrival and appearance of everything being messy, chaotic, and functionally poorly designed.
Now for positiveness: I am glad to read that bit. Maybe someone will hear the gripes about accessibility and little silly things like no thread preview and badly placed quote buttons. And when it's finally cleared up there's a lot to like; wsiwyg editing for wordprocessor-to-browser CPing, community groups for combined homebrew efforts, a wiki for wiki-ing, and such. I just wish I could see it all on my monitor.
I hope they get with the age and show a scrollable box above/below the reply box that has the entire thread in it starting with most recent posts. Then have a button next to it that says "Quote selected text" that quotes it and even puts the poster and everything properly.
Of course I'd really love to see them just scrap this and go with google wave which is 300% better than both the old forums and this new one (crap). It also uses standard protocols and languages which means it will work with all of the major browsers and most of the more popular ones right out of the box. It also has most of the functionality of photos and videos and other parts of this website built into it.
These people are supposed to be professionals who build social networking sites. You have to be ragingly incompetant to think these forums are acceptable. All you have to do is look at any other forum.
For more corproite clientele, these site is very much acceptable (would still require some fix's, but acceptable). Many of the issues currently plaguing the boards at the moment are more issues with functionallity and cosmetic conrcerns as it relates to us, the demographic users of the community, and not so much with the existance of a community in general. AKA, just because the site is unacceptable to you as a gamer used to websites that have been chosen by you to meet your preferences, does not mean that these forums are unacceptable to anyone who the professionals you are condeming may have as clientele outside of the gaming genre. Not all social networks are for internet geeks, many more will be corporate intranets. And to those people, this new site would very much be acceptable (as is, even with it's bugs, it is a supperior community then my last two companies have had).
The gray line isn't good enough. Its not visible enough, for one thing; if it was a big dark gray or blue box, that'd be one thing, but as-is, its not immediately obvious. Alternating colors are much better, and are pretty standard.
But thats simply cosmetic. the old boards never had the feature (alternating colours posts) your demanding, yet I never saw any complaints there. I can only then assume that this is an improvement you would like to see, rather then an actual cause for the forums sucking as you posited as, because condemning a site for not having a feature that didn't exist in it's previous incarnation only seems petty, not actually relevant.
Its obnoxious to read, and given that is what you do on forums...
the old boards also had an obxosious posting format that people had to manually adjust for... IE, no spacing whatsoever. It was easily accounted for, but it did need to be accounted for (and not all posters knew as much. The point though is that it is still just a minor cosmetic issue that can and likely will be corrected. Condemning the site for something that can and likely will be easily adjusted is rather premature.
Given how often I posted on the errata forums, I'm well aware of that.
and yet, I never once saw a complaint about it on the old boards, but now that it has become a more prevalant, not only is it unacceptable, but you are actually coming off as claiming noone would ever make that kind of blunder... But I see the very same format on many forums outside the gaming community, so your wrong. it wasn't an issue on the old boards, so it is fairly easy to understand why it may not have been thought to be an issue here, until it became apparent these new boards had more instances of the issue. IE, it isn't the existance of the issue thats the problem, as you suggest, but rather the frequency of it, which is far easier to overlook, unless you have the benifit of armchair quarterbacking.
It doesn't matter if they forgot it or didn't think to implement it - only an incompetent would not put in such a feature. Its completely standard on forums. These people, again, are supposed to be professionals, and when they make the actual forum part worse, then they should never work in this industry. Heck, most forums now allow you to make a quick response without even changing pages, and this forum doesn't incorporate that feature either. Its not like the Wotc folks don't use forums. This is on the people they hired to do the new community site.
You keep saying "Most sites", but you need to realize that you are talking about "most sites you have deamed as desireable to participate on" I have seen many sites (particularly intranet corporate sites) that don't have that feature. It is a good feature and I myself would liek to see it's return, but I'm not so arrogant as to believe that it is such a common and acknowledged feature (it is easily overloked until it is absent) as to think noone would forget about it.
Yes, I want to argue that the new forums suck because they are worse than the old forums for what you actually use a forum for, and they will continue to be worse until they have at least:
What I'm saying is your judgement is premature and overexagerated, given the site is still acknowledged as a work in progress, with corrections and feature requests being incorporated each day, as well as many of your complaints are more a matter of personal preference and cosmetics as they relate to "our" (gaming) community rather then actual issues for a "general", non specific community.
1) Much more visible post demarcation.
2) A different color scheme.
3) The ability to read the thread while you respond to it.
4) Put the buttons to quote and edit posts down at the bottom of the post, where they belong.
5) Bring back quick response.
Not a single one of these is something that is crucial to a forum. they are all cosmetic preferences and personal conveniences (Heck, I have a blog that contains far more complaints, most of which are far more significant then yours, and I still have chosen to reserve judgement until they deem the site as finished). Hardly reasons to claim a website still in construction as "Sucking".
You'll excuse me if I continue to consider your posts claiming these forums suck as just what the OP was talking about.
These people are supposed to be professionals who build social networking sites. You have to be ragingly incompetant to think these forums are acceptable. All you have to do is look at any other forum.
For more corproite clientele, these site is very much acceptable (would still require some fix's, but acceptable). Many of the issues currently plaguing the boards at the moment are more issues with functionallity and cosmetic conrcerns as it relates to us, the demographic users of the community, and not so much with the existance of a community in general. AKA, just because the site is unacceptable to you as a gamer used to websites that have been chosen by you to meet your preferences, does not mean that these forums are unacceptable to anyone who the professionals you are condeming may have as clientele outside of the gaming genre. Not all social networks are for internet geeks, many more will be corporate intranets. And to those people, this new site would very much be acceptable (as is, even with it's bugs, it is a supperior community then my last two companies have had).
The gray line isn't good enough. Its not visible enough, for one thing; if it was a big dark gray or blue box, that'd be one thing, but as-is, its not immediately obvious. Alternating colors are much better, and are pretty standard.But thats simply cosmetic. the old boards never had the feature (alternating colours posts) your demanding, yet I never saw any complaints there. I can only then assume that this is an improvement you would like to see, rather then an actual cause for the forums sucking as you posited as, because condemning a site for not having a feature that didn't exist in it's previous incarnation only seems petty, not actually relevant.
Its obnoxious to read, and given that is what you do on forums...the old boards also had an obxosious posting format that people had to manually adjust for... IE, no spacing whatsoever. It was easily accounted for, but it did need to be accounted for (and not all posters knew as much. The point though is that it is still just a minor cosmetic issue that can and likely will be corrected. Condemning the site for something that can and likely will be easily adjusted is rather premature.
Given how often I posted on the errata forums, I'm well aware of that.and yet, I never once saw a complaint about it on the old boards, but now that it has become a more prevalant, not only is it unacceptable, but you are actually coming off as claiming noone would ever make that kind of blunder... But I see the very same format on many forums outside the gaming community, so your wrong. it wasn't an issue on the old boards, so it is fairly easy to understand why it may not have been thought to be an issue here, until it became apparent these new boards had more instances of the issue. IE, it isn't the existance of the issue thats the problem, as you suggest, but rather the frequency of it, which is far easier to overlook, unless you have the benifit of armchair quarterbacking.
It doesn't matter if they forgot it or didn't think to implement it - only an incompetent would not put in such a feature. Its completely standard on forums. These people, again, are supposed to be professionals, and when they make the actual forum part worse, then they should never work in this industry. Heck, most forums now allow you to make a quick response without even changing pages, and this forum doesn't incorporate that feature either. Its not like the Wotc folks don't use forums. This is on the people they hired to do the new community site.You keep saying "Most sites", but you need to realize that you are talking about "most sites you have deamed as desireable to participate on" I have seen many sites (particularly intranet corporate sites) that don't have that feature. It is a good feature and I myself would liek to see it's return, but I'm not so arrogant as to believe that it is such a common and acknowledged feature (it is easily overloked until it is absent) as to think noone would forget about it.
Yes, I want to argue that the new forums suck because they are worse than the old forums for what you actually use a forum for, and they will continue to be worse until they have at least:
What I'm saying is your judgement is premature and overexagerated, given the site is still acknowledged as a work in progress, with corrections and feature requests being incorporated each day, as well as many of your complaints are more a matter of personal preference and cosmetics as they relate to "our" (gaming) community rather then actual issues for a "general", non specific community.
1) Much more visible post demarcation.
2) A different color scheme.
3) The ability to read the thread while you respond to it.
4) Put the buttons to quote and edit posts down at the bottom of the post, where they belong.
5) Bring back quick response.
Not a single one of these is something that is crucial to a forum. they are all cosmetic preferences and personal conveniences (Heck, I have a blog that contains far more complaints, most of which are far more significant then yours, and I still have chosen to reserve judgement until they deem the site as finished). Hardly reasons to claim a website still in construction as "Sucking".
You'll excuse me if I continue to consider your posts claiming these forums suck as just what the OP was talking about.
First off your assuming that when they say "Beta" they mean something along the lines of "work in progress". I really wished they had posted that instead of "Beta". I would have had entirely different expectations. A "Beta" is feature complete and only has minor bugs to work out. In other words it has all the functionality. This forum however is missing a lot of functionality and the bugs are a lot more than 'minor'.
I agree some of the things people complain about are minor problems like the white background. This they can simply override in their browsers settings (annoying I know, but still workable). Other things like not being able to find the threads you posted in without having to click through seven links and then scrolling through 2-3 pages of posts to find where you left off are not acceptable. So if they took down the whole "Beta" description and put up "From scratch work in progress - help us test as we develop" or something along those lines I'd be perfectly happy with it. Of course they'd have to put the old forums back up along side them in the meantime.
Also while it might appear that things like sblocks and spoiler blocks are minor things, there are many threads on other pages that used them extensively and are now so difficult to read that they are just about unusable. So on the surface the sblock issue looks minor, but is a major deal breaker for many people. In fact just take a look at this post, I bet between your post and mine we took up about half a page. That's just 2 posts. I'd like to put some of your quote in sblocks for readability, but can't.
You also make the mistake of thinking this site is somehow comparable to business intranet sites. This is nothing like that. Those sites are geared toward productivity, while these kinds of sites are geared toward fan interest and drawing in customers. If EnWorld does it better the fans can go over there and ignore this. A business intranet site is just about required to be used if you are employed by those businesses.
So in a way I agree with both of you. Some people go overboard, but others have genuine complaints that should have been addressed at the design stage.
First off your assuming that when they say "Beta" they mean something along the lines of "work in progress". I really wished they had posted that instead of "Beta". I would have had entirely different expectations. A "Beta" is feature complete and only has minor bugs to work out. In other words it has all the functionality. This forum however is missing a lot of functionality and the bugs are a lot more than 'minor'.
I agree some of the things people complain about are minor problems like the white background. This they can simply override in their browsers settings (annoying I know, but still workable). Other things like not being able to find the threads you posted in without having to click through seven links and then scrolling through 2-3 pages of posts to find where you left off are not acceptable. So if they took down the whole "Beta" description and put up "From scratch work in progress - help us test as we develop" or something along those lines I'd be perfectly happy with it. Of course they'd have to put the old forums back up along side them in the meantime.
Also while it might appear that things like sblocks and spoiler blocks are minor things, there are many threads on other pages that used them extensively and are now so difficult to read that they are just about unusable. So on the surface the sblock issue looks minor, but is a major deal breaker for many people. In fact just take a look at this post, I bet between your post and mine we took up about half a page. That's just 2 posts. I'd like to put some of your quote in sblocks for readability, but can't.
You also make the mistake of thinking this site is somehow comparable to business intranet sites. This is nothing like that. Those sites are geared toward productivity, while these kinds of sites are geared toward fan interest and drawing in customers. If EnWorld does it better the fans can go over there and ignore this. A business intranet site is just about required to be used if you are employed by those businesses.
So in a way I agree with both of you. Some people go overboard, but others have genuine complaints that should have been addressed at the design stage.
I never once in the post you quoted spoke of a Beta. I was more specifically speaking about the quote by Willfuqua near the beginning of this thread where they say specifically that the site was brought up early so we had at least something, but they were continuing to restore lost functionality (and you know if they took till the end of the month (or longer as they suggest it might have taken, to get it right) people would have complained they took too long and they said it would be released on aug 26... people will always find something to complain about... at least this way they get to make constructive use of those complaints to make this site better (and admittedly, have an excuse for the missing functionality, which they wouldn't have had had they opened it late).)
This was posted:
"Yes, the forums unfortunately took a bit of a hit as far as features and looks go. We're working on restoring the functionality you're used to as soon as possible, but we didn't want to have to keep the forums down another few weeks to do it--going live as-is and having at least something for you guys to use was seen as a better option than waiting however many weeks or months it would take to make everything perfect before letting you in. Rest assured that the techs are working hard at restoring the features we know you miss."
Don't know if you read it.
I just wish Will had posted a source for the quote.
As to the Sblock issue, or more specifically, the BBCode issue, I have not said it is a minor issue. I personally believe it's loss isn't as significant as many believe, with the sole exception of the damage done to the old posts that have been migrated over. It is a minor loss as far as going ahead though. Now we have groups, wiki, HTML codes, etc to allow us to organize our content, and while the inconvenience of having to learn these new methods over the old is unpleasant, combined with a distinct lack of any sblock equivalent, it is a still a minor issue IMHO. But despite this, The powers that be have acknowledged the damage done and the desire to keep Sblocks and have specifically stated, via this thread (4th noted item down), that it is something they are working to repair/return. So despite it being a more significant issue then alternating post colour, as they have already acknowledged they are working to replace it, I continue to think that someone claiming the new site "sucks" because of it's absence is both overreacting and acting prematurely, which has been the crux of my arguments to this point.
As to comparing this to business intranet sites, my point was that TD was saying the makers of this site are "supposedly" professionals and should know better then to make the mistakes being made here, but as intranet communities can, and likely are, a fairly large portion of these professionals clientele, and the problems TD has complained about would not be problems in a corporate intranet site, he is applying an inappropriate standard and condemning the professionals (by calling them ragingly incompetent) who made this site for not meeting that inappropriate standard. AKA, just because this site has some problems for us, does not mean those who made those problems are inept, it just means they did not acquire the right information from their clients (Wizards, who are not developers and who would make such mistakes) about what was needed. Perhaps Wizards should have posted a thread requesting what features the community would have liked to have maintained, but that was not an issue of the developers, and the developers should not be condemned for all these mistakes as TD has done. (though they aren't perfect, they have made some pretty basic mistakes, but I would not go so far as to call them ragingly incompetent).
I have no problems with people complaining and producing lists of problems (I have a fairly large blog just for that very purpose (I keep editing it as I find new issues, just as a personal checklist). It's those who are passing judgements like "this site sucks" that I am addressing
I never once in the post you quoted spoke of a Beta. I was more specifically speaking about the quote by Willfuqua near the beginning of this thread where they say specifically that the site was brought up early so we had at least something, but they were continuing to restore lost functionality (and you know if they took till the end of the month (or longer as they suggest it might have taken, to get it right) people would have complained they took too long and they said it would be released on aug 26... people will always find something to complain about... at least this way they get to make constructive use of those complaints to make this site better (and admittedly, have an excuse for the missing functionality, which they wouldn't have had had they opened it late).)
I was talking about WotC calling it a beta and you assuming they meant something along the lines of pre-alpha or as you said "work in progress". these are not what a beta are. Betas are totally functional and have minor bugs, this site has many many problems and not just formatting. So it really doesn't qualify as a beta.
What they should have done was leave the old forums open to all users and had a 'New Forums - under development' button that would allow people to 'test' out the new forums and community features, but instead of doing that they force everyone to come to the new community page. That right there should indicate that someone doesn't know what they are doing, whether it be a lead developer, an outside company, or a manager somewhere.
This was posted:
"Yes, the forums unfortunately took a bit of a hit as far as features and looks go. We're working on restoring the functionality you're used to as soon as possible, but we didn't want to have to keep the forums down another few weeks to do it--going live as-is and having at least something for you guys to use was seen as a better option than waiting however many weeks or months it would take to make everything perfect before letting you in. Rest assured that the techs are working hard at restoring the features we know you miss."
Don't know if you read it.
I just wish Will had posted a source for the quote.
As to the Sblock issue, or more specifically, the BBCode issue, I have not said it is a minor issue. I personally believe it's loss isn't as significant as many believe, with the sole exception of the damage done to the old posts that have been migrated over. It is a minor loss as far as going ahead though. Now we have groups, wiki, HTML codes, etc to allow us to organize our content, and while the inconvenience of having to learn these new methods over the old is unpleasant, combined with a distinct lack of any sblock equivalent, it is a still a minor issue IMHO. But despite this, The powers that be have acknowledged the damage done and the desire to keep Sblocks and have specifically stated, via this thread (4th noted item down), that it is something they are working to repair/return. So despite it being a more significant issue then alternating post colour, as they have already acknowledged they are working to replace it, I continue to think that someone claiming the new site "sucks" because of it's absence is both overreacting and acting prematurely, which has been the crux of my arguments to this point.
I think that it isn't any single feature (non-corporate speak 'bug') that causes people to say the community pages 'suck' I think its the fact that there are 13 minor things that annoy the crap out of them, and 7 major things that make it difficult to even post or find what they are looking for.
I agree with them at this point, but let me articulate what I mean when I say 'suck'.
This forum sucks = This forum is designed poorly from a formatting perspective. It also has problems where finding posts that we have posted in are, the search functionality has been nerfed, the white background hurts my eyes (forcing me to take breaks every so often), I have to open two windows when I reply to a topic (one to reply and the other to read the topic), and on and on and on. I could go on all day, but I won't.
As to comparing this to business intranet sites, my point was that TD was saying the makers of this site are "supposedly" professionals and should know better then to make the mistakes being made here, but as intranet communities can, and likely are, a fairly large portion of these professionals clientele, and the problems TD has complained about would not be problems in a corporate intranet site, he is applying an inappropriate standard and condemning the professionals (by calling them ragingly incompetent) who made this site for not meeting that inappropriate standard. AKA, just because this site has some problems for us, does not mean those who made those problems are inept, it just means they did not acquire the right information from their clients (Wizards, who are not developers and who would make such mistakes) about what was needed. Perhaps Wizards should have posted a thread requesting what features the community would have liked to have maintained, but that was not an issue of the developers, and the developers should not be condemned for all these mistakes as TD has done. (though they aren't perfect, they have made some pretty basic mistakes, but I would not go so far as to call them ragingly incompetent).I have no problems with people complaining and producing lists of problems (I have a fairly large blog just for that very purpose (I keep editing it as I find new issues, just as a personal checklist). It's those who are passing judgements like "this site sucks" that I am addressing
I'm still not understanding the correlation? does the company that makes this community page produce mainly internal websites for businesses? if that is the case then your arguments are valid, but I think they produce community pages for companies fanbases (though I haven't been to the site so I don't really know). Which means they should be up on current trends and know from experience what the fanbases like and don't like in a community page. Since it appears they don't I have to say they probably just got the cheapest bid, which re-inforces my beleif that WotC is a pure money eating corporation.
They are primiarly a social network site builder, and indeed, they've worked for another gaming company previously.
the search functionality has been nerfed
The search wasn't even functional on the old site. I don't understand how it's been "nerfed."
Oh, I wasn't aware voicing my opinion about how a forum I once enjoyed visiting now hurts my eyes and gives me a headache, I guess I'm just whining for the sake of it eh? Never mind the physical pain I endure when I spend any length of time here now, that's just me complaining for no reason at all, I should just play through the pain eh?
I keep seeing people complain about the white background. I have severe eyessight problems, blind in one eye since my 12th birthday and gradaully worsening eyesight in my "good" eye since then. I am registered as severely partially sighted. But, I actually prefer the new look. Due to my poor eyesight I have the monitor brightness turned down anyway, but the high contrast between the text and background makes it much more bearable for me.
However, if it annoys this many people this much, then there should definitely be an option to change it. But please don't take it away completely and replace it with something that my poor eyesight couldn't handle.
the search functionality has been nerfed
The search wasn't even functional on the old site. I don't understand how it's been "nerfed."
The old site I could hit advanced search, type my name into the poster box and bam I could see every post I'd posted in, in order from most recently posted in to oldest.
Now you type your name in and bam it starts checking every thread for every post you've ever made. Giving 2000 results in no particular order.
"The old site I could hit advanced search, type my name into the poster box and bam I could see every post I'd posted in, in order from most recently posted in to oldest."
Clicking on the little picture beneath your avatar does that now. It will give you the option to view all post by this member.
People will always complain. It's damn near a requirement for some on the Internet it seems. They also do it in a public manner to get others on board with the line of thinking that it will start a revolution.
There are entire books written on the subject... 
Hai guise,
I'm gonna start off by saying I'm not trying to piss anyone off or annoy anyone, but I'm noticing this strange pattern and I catch myself doing it every now and then too.
I remember when 4th was announced people whined about it before they even got a glance at it. "3.5 is fine! Why do we need 4th?!" I agreed, 3.5 was fine although our party was suffering from serious balancing issues, 3.5 was open for so much tweaking and variants, it was perfectly capable or stablising itself. But wasn't that the point? 3.5 was done. How many books are there? At least 80 3.5 books, not to mentioned the total 3E which I think is about 300 or something? I'm just guessing, but it's not like we NEEDED new books.
4th was released, it's very new and different and some love it, some don't, but it doesn't change a thing. 3.5 didn't need new material and 4th was just the way for WotC to continue D&D without trouble.
Now, I didn't check the forums when WotC went to Gleemax, but I'm sure there was whining. Now, there's whining about this forum. Not just the general "Meh, it works but it could be better, it's not much of an upgrade" but actual "I hate it!" "This sucks!".
Is anyone else noticing this pattern? And can someone please tell these people to just count to 10 for a change? Rationality comes a long way and other than the double-enter thing, I haven't really noticed anything annoying about the new forums.
Just count to 10 people. Be patient and be glad WotC provides all this. Even for previous editions there are still places to go.
Cheers and seriously, don't get pissed
Peter aka Ekkoe
EDIT: Ironically, I had to fix some double-enters ;)
I actually generally respond to new content favorably. I am more than willing to pay "early adaptor" fees with home technology, and suck it up when stuff in "beta" isn't fully refined.
I liked 4E fine. The rulebooks were great. The new philosophies were things I agreed with. I liked the flavor of almost everything (except the Planes).
The disappointment was getting all hyped up for D&DI/VTT/CV as part of fourth edition only to not have those things still to this day.
When I saw the new site, I actually thought this was pretty good. I immediately began to edit my campaign wiki, form a group for our campaign, choose an avatar, and so forth.
It wasn't until I was unable to do most of those things effectively that I began to complain. And even then, my threads are not: "OMGZ0RZ, it sucks! Revert back!"
They're more like: "What the heck do I do now?"
Well, you can start by posting in the respective threads with bugs and feature requests. If you want anything to get done, you have to define the problem. I can't speak for the op, but I have been complaining about the whining. But I honestly don't mind if people have issues with the site. I just get sick of "THIS SUX!" posts. They're really unhelpfull to anyone involved and they are annoying as hell to read. Not only that, but there's nothing there for WotC to act on. How can they fix it when someone just says: "THIS SUX! I HATE THIS FORUM!"?
Well, you can start by posting in the respective threads with bugs and feature requests. If you want anything to get done, you have to define the problem. I can't speak for the op, but I have been complaining about the whining. But I honestly don't mind if people have issues with the site. I just get sick of "THIS SUX!" posts. They're really unhelpfull to anyone involved and they are annoying as hell to read. Not only that, but there's nothing there for WotC to act on. How can they fix it when someone just says: "THIS SUX! I HATE THIS FORUM!"?
QFT. I've even sigged as much
I'm somewhat tired of hearing, "Well, if you learn HTML...," or, "If you change YOUR settings, it's not so bad!" as excuses. I already know 4 Programming Languages, I am not interested in HTML; thank you for the offer, but no. I use the Family computer, and though turning down the contrast and brightness certainly help, I'm sure I'll be hearing complaints sometime in the near future.
Either accept that the subject you are discussing is flawed and leave people who hate on it (with decent complaints, anyway) alone, or please just shut up. Your opinion is no better or worse than anyone else's, so complaining about the complaining is not only pointless, stupid, and hypocritical, it's baseless whining to begin with. The people complaing about suck-itude have a point; the people complaing about those people do not.
Actually, there is a basis. Valid complaints and concerns are getting buried amongst the incessant whinning and hate-on some posters, such as this one, this one, this one and this one are displaying... just as a few quick examples. Again, there is a distinct difference between offering advice and concerns, and just moaning and griping (and I really don't understand why this is such a hard concept to grasp IE, when we say stop whinning, we're not saying stop posting concerns). I have a blog of problems linked in my sig as an example of expressing my concerns, but making judgements without any real feedback is not only unhelpful, but it's disruptive.
the problem is, that there are many "everything's alright" posters in this place as well, and it's hard to distinguish. and very often, those are just the same like the "everything's always bad" posters, just that they come from a different direction.
when people say whining, they almost NEVER distinguish between honest concerns and criticism, and just hate/nerdrage. how difficult is THAT to understand?
also, no thread like this will ever change ANYTHING about it. if at all, you're doing exactly the same you're condoning, and to me, that's hypocrisy at its best.
Differentiating whinning vs offering concerns was actually defined by the OP, so it really shouldn't need to be reiterated by every poster in this thread, despite that, it has been reiterated quite often.
Now, there's whining about this forum. Not just the general "Meh, it works but it could be better, it's not much of an upgrade" but actual "I hate it!" "This sucks!".
Well the issue is people keep bringing up that they're not whining so someone has to explain it again. And again. And again.
Maybe the people who are whining aren't reading this thread? It's a possibility.
They have stated they're working on it. They have stated they wanted to go live and give us something to work with in the interim.
Relax. Breathe. It'll be fixed soon.
And will those who DON'T like the new community site and get angry at those who do like it (me) for saying they do just give it up? I've had people messaging me telling me "You're not being constructive at all" (courtesy of Shadowchu) simply because I'm liking the new direction and they hate it.
I know, some people have a hard time reading it. I do too. I can barely stand MtG Foils sometimes for this reason, but they've stated that they are working on it so please chillax.
Hugs to all!
WTF!
I madfe a group, made its calendar and put my birthday on it. You can see the red date on the calendar it it says it is my birthday if you hold the mouse cursor over it but the header or whatever you call it) says there are no upcoming events on the calendar.
OMG! I was talking about the words listed under my calendar. They say the following: "There are no upcoming events for this calendar." Not sure what to call that group of words, I referred to it as a "h-e-a-d-e-r" without the hyphens and the forum removed it!
Is it just me or is it stupid that that word is not allowed in a forum full of messages, notes, bulletins, and the like?
edit note: removed the bit that said "text removed" and put the original back in. header stands this time. I'm confused.
Actually, there is a basis. Valid complaints and concerns are getting buried amongst the incessant whinning and hate-on some posters, such as this one, this one, this one and this one are displaying... just as a few quick examples. Again, there is a distinct difference between offering advice and concerns, and just moaning and griping (and I really don't understand why this is such a hard concept to grasp IE, when we say stop whinning, we're not saying stop posting concerns). I have a blog of problems linked in my sig as an example of expressing my concerns, but making judgements without any real feedback is not only unhelpful, but it's disruptive.
Why is my post in there? I give a concise and descriptive reason of why I don't like the new forums. I don't whine like the other posts do. Please edit me off your list.
I find it humorous when a topic listed under the most viewed topic sidebar of links and pictures is listed in its forum as having zero views.
Why is my post in there? I give a concise and descriptive reason of why I don't like the new forums. I don't whine like the other posts do. Please edit me off your list.
I didn't see where your consise and descriptive reasons were. It is better than the other two but the, "WotC you screwed this up..." puts it over. IMO anyways.
I saw this on another thread:
****ss
g
u
i
n
n
e
s
s
I saw this somewhere else. The profanity nerfer has gone crazy.
Note: for those who did not catch it, the nerfed horizontal word is the same as the vertical one.
edite what is "g u i n n e" without the spaces that would cause it to be nerfed?
Maybe the forum is thinking it is (or it's gonna be) the ethnic slur for individuals of Italian descent?
I saw this on another thread:
****ss
g
u
i
n
n
e
s
s
I saw this somewhere else. The profanity nerfer has gone crazy.
Note: for those who did not catch it, the nerfed horizontal word is the same as the vertical one.
edite what is "g u i n n e" without the spaces that would cause it to be nerfed?
Thanks for pointing this out, Rumple. I don't know why I didn't think to do so. Much appreciated.
@Mock, I was thinking the same thing. I'm fairly certain that that word is spelled differently, though.
Thanks for pointing this out, Rumple. I don't know why I didn't think to do so. Much appreciated.@Mock, I was thinking the same thing. I'm fairly certain that that word is spelled differently, though.
Well don't thank me too much. I thought it was silly and entertaining and that is why I put it in the "whining for the sake of it" thread. 
I figure you were merely expressing annoyance and I concurred that it was silly. So, I whined about it in the thread for whining. To be clear, I was not insinuating that you were whining but rather stating that I was just goofing off going and making a bigger deal about it than you did. But, maybe you were going along and pretending that I was being serious. *scratches head* Oh well, I will just make certain to point out that this was good natured in intent and a merely a continued poking fun at the oddities of the new system.
Carry on.
Well don't thank me too much. I thought it was silly and entertaining and that is why I put it in the "whining for the sake of it" thread.I figure you were merely expressing annoyance and I concurred that it was silly. So, I whined about it in the thread for whining. To be clear, I was not insinuating that you were whining but rather stating that I was just goofing off going and making a bigger deal about it than you did. But, maybe you were going along and pretending that I was being serious. *scratches head* Oh well, I will just make certain to point out that this was good natured in intent and a merely a continued poking fun at the oddities of the new system.
Carry on.
No worries. I ... uhh ... may have been exaggerating a bit myself when I was complaining about it in the other thread.
Like you said, it's more silly than anything else.Why is my post in there? I give a concise and descriptive reason of why I don't like the new forums. I don't whine like the other posts do. Please edit me off your list.
I was skimming looking for posts that didn't offer any constructive criticism. You instead choose to use a comparison to another site (still didn't specify which parts you liked from that site over this one, and saying all just isn't helpful, but...), and I admit I missed that (had I notice it I would not have included your post), but I don't believe in revisionist history so hopefully this appology for it's inclusion will suffice in place of an edit.
I like the new community site design. For one, I simply didn't use the old one - I really didn't care to keep track about what people were flaming each other for, or what new "broken" builds people can come up with. These things simply aren't in the scope of my interests.
Almost all of my online gaming resources are involved with keeping in touch with players and DMs, both former and current. For that specific purpose, the old boards were far inferior to even basic e-mail.
However, this new site is actually more of a community website. It's actually useful to me! I can make a group for my current campaign, and I LOVE the wiki feature that lets me put up information and house rules for all my players to peruse at their leisure. And I'm amazed that all of this is free. I don't understand why people complain about free things - no-one's forcing you to use this. *shrug*
Gleemax was the right idea, but it seems like the idea was underdeveloped, and Gleemax had some major problems due to the designer's complete disconnect with the Dungeons and Dragons community (like using an obscure Magic joke for the name). A horrible, horrible color scheme didn't help.
Yeah, this new site needs work. Although, except for the inability to review a thread when replying, I personally am not seeing any major problems.
So, personally, I refute the argument that this new community site is "clearly inferior" to the old one. To me, the old one was worthless. This new one? I'm actually using. It's a personal preference - neither one is "clearly superior" to the other.
I like the new community site design. For one, I simply didn't use the old one - I really didn't care to keep track about what people were flaming each other for, or what new "broken" builds people can come up with. These things simply aren't in the scope of my interests.
Almost all of my online gaming resources are involved with keeping in touch with players and DMs, both former and current. For that specific purpose, the old boards were far inferior to even basic e-mail.
However, this new site is actually more of a community website. It's actually useful to me! I can make a group for my current campaign, and I LOVE the wiki feature that lets me put up information and house rules for all my players to peruse at their leisure. And I'm amazed that all of this is free. I don't understand why people complain about free things - no-one's forcing you to use this. *shrug*
Gleemax was the right idea, but it seems like the idea was underdeveloped, and Gleemax had some major problems due to the designer's complete disconnect with the Dungeons and Dragons community (like using an obscure Magic joke for the name). A horrible, horrible color scheme didn't help.
Yeah, this new site needs work. Although, except for the inability to review a thread when replying, I personally am not seeing any major problems.
So, personally, I refute the argument that this new community site is "clearly inferior" to the old one. To me, the old one was worthless. This new one? I'm actually using. It's a personal preference - neither one is "clearly superior" to the other.
I like the new site but this post makes me wonder...
You did know that you could have adjusted your settings on the old system to allow emails to be sent as well as PMs, right? So, it wasn't inferior to email because it had the capability of doing the exact same thing. They would just have needed to make an account which I believe tey will still need todo if they wish to take advantage of any of the group features other than just reading things.
You could have created a thread in the old houserules and homebrew forum to do what you want to do with the wiki now. Your individual posts could have been edited to change things. Your players could have added there characters and made their individual edits. By subscribing to the threads you could have had a host of threads regarding a campaign in one easy to reach location. For (I am guessing) the same effort as ediiting the wiki you could have added all the links to the thread(s) in houserules and homebrew and then everyone could easily have subscribed to the threads to see everything. Once the important posts are made new information could be added in a new post to the thread (which would alert any viewers that there was a new post) and then it could be linked to in the OP. If this new information superceded an old entry then one could edit it into the old entry as well as making a new post.
I guess the point that I am making is that all your game information could have been handled just as easily on te old forums as you appear to be planning to do now. With the new system there is probably less chance of garbage posts but everything could have been done with probably the same amount of work so long as you knew how to handle the many features of the forum. Now, I need to learn some new things such as html and wiki editing. But, it seems that perhaps you are already familiar with tese. Six up and a half dozen down I guess
Something else for me to whine about...
When you click on the "blue" name of the poster to make the last post in a thread while viewing a forum you are taken to that post. However, when you click on the "blue" name of a poster within a thread you are taken to that poster's profile site rather than that quote
From the post above this one...
I like the new site but this post makes me wonder...
Why is my post in there? I give a concise and descriptive reason of why I don't like the new forums. I don't whine like the other posts do. Please edit me off your list.
I was skimming looking for posts that didn't offer any constructive criticism. You instead choose to use a comparison to another site (still didn't specify which parts you liked from that site over this one, and saying all just isn't helpful, but...), and I admit I missed that (had I notice it I would not have included your post), but I don't believe in revisionist history so hopefully this appology for it's inclusion will suffice in place of an edit.
That's fine. Thank you.
I like the new community site design. For one, I simply didn't use the old one - I really didn't care to keep track about what people were flaming each other for, or what new "broken" builds people can come up with. These things simply aren't in the scope of my interests.
Almost all of my online gaming resources are involved with keeping in touch with players and DMs, both former and current. For that specific purpose, the old boards were far inferior to even basic e-mail.
However, this new site is actually more of a community website. It's actually useful to me! I can make a group for my current campaign, and I LOVE the wiki feature that lets me put up information and house rules for all my players to peruse at their leisure. And I'm amazed that all of this is free. I don't understand why people complain about free things - no-one's forcing you to use this. *shrug*
Gleemax was the right idea, but it seems like the idea was underdeveloped, and Gleemax had some major problems due to the designer's complete disconnect with the Dungeons and Dragons community (like using an obscure Magic joke for the name). A horrible, horrible color scheme didn't help.
Yeah, this new site needs work. Although, except for the inability to review a thread when replying, I personally am not seeing any major problems.
So, personally, I refute the argument that this new community site is "clearly inferior" to the old one. To me, the old one was worthless. This new one? I'm actually using. It's a personal preference - neither one is "clearly superior" to the other.
Now see your getting things confused. People are not complaining about the 'community site' they are complaining about the 'forums' which is a part of the 'community site'. Huge difference. Of course the whole black on white thing is just annoying.
Of course the whole black on white thing is just annoying.
Not to me and my poor eyesight it isn't. It makes it nice and easy for me to read (along with the BBC News website that also has it's articles with black text on white background).
Of course the whole black on white thing is just annoying.Not to me and my poor eyesight it isn't. It makes it nice and easy for me to read (along with the BBC News website that also has it's articles with black text on white background).
Big fan of clear black and white myself.
Of course the whole black on white thing is just annoying.
So... You don't read newspapers?
Or... Books?
Of course the whole black on white thing is just annoying.
So... You don't read newspapers?Or... Books?
Not that I don't get your point, but books and newspapers aren't backlit. Just something to consider.
Not that I don't get your point, but books and newspapers aren't backlit. Just something to consider.
also, my favorite newspaper is kinda orange, and the second in my priority list is printed on what looks like recycled paper. the problem is not whether you like black on white. hey, i even used the low bandwidth theme on the old forums (for those who don't know: it was black on white).
the problem is something entirely different, however. this design is forced upon us all, as the difference between magic, dnd and wotc themes is just three colors for links. (orange, red, blue, in case you have not checked it out yet), and the background, which is mainly hidden behind the all-white tables anyway.
so, even if many people will not like other themes, what we really need is choice. what i currently need most is +80% font-size and an off-white theme, with maybe no background image or a more ... quite one.
Of course the whole black on white thing is just annoying.
So... You don't read newspapers?Or... Books?
Newspapers and books are not printed on pure-blinding-white, newspapers are printed on gray recycled paper, and books are printed on off-white paper.
It looks like the forums now have an off white color behind the posts.
Actually you might be right... It never bothered me though so I'm probably not the best judge of if it's better now or not.
Newspapers and books are not printed on pure-blinding-white, newspapers are printed on gray recycled paper, and books are printed on off-white paper.
Studies show that printed word works better black on white for heavy, involved reading. Monitors are the opposite. White on black works best for heavy reading.
Of course, I don't consider the forums "heavy reading" myself. It's not the same as reading a novel.
Actually you might be right... It never bothered me though so I'm probably not the best judge of if it's better now or not.
Newspapers and books are not printed on pure-blinding-white, newspapers are printed on gray recycled paper, and books are printed on off-white paper.Studies show that printed word works better black on white for heavy, involved reading. Monitors are the opposite. White on black works best for heavy reading.
Of course, I don't consider the forums "heavy reading" myself. It's not the same as reading a novel.
The paper color is an off-white, not pure white. Also monitors emit light, therefore they are much more harmful to the eyes (or irritating anyway) than books or newpapers (at least until we get them on lit up paper).
I would suggest that a lot of folks go to dark sites, and turn up the brightness on their monitors so when they come here, everything seems super bright.
I would suggest that a lot of folks go to dark sites, and turn up the brightness on their monitors so when they come here, everything seems super bright.
Excellent idea. :P
On a more serious note, the problem is that I have my computer hooked up to my flat scrren tv so I don't want to adjust my brightness all the time.
Anyway, I have a lot of "complaints" in this thread but I am intentionally going by the title and whining for the sake of it. Most of the things I have mentioned don't really boter me longer than the second or two it takes me to run into it and move past and not really that much even then. The color and "lighting", on the other hand, are continuous. But, I figure something will be changed or some more options will eventually be added.
I am just taking advantage of te opportunity to complain for fun in a thread that sounds like it is made for just that purpose.
Note: This makes no implications about anyone else's reasons for posting or the legitimacy of the ir complaints. I am just speaking for myself. 
This was posted:"Yes, the forums unfortunately took a bit of a hit as far as features and looks go. We're working on restoring the functionality you're used to as soon as possible, but we didn't want to have to keep the forums down another few weeks to do it--going live as-is and having at least something for you guys to use was seen as a better option than waiting however many weeks or months it would take to make everything perfect before letting you in. Rest assured that the techs are working hard at restoring the features we know you miss."
Don't know if you read it.
I just wish Will had posted a source for the quote.
Just saw this post--the source of that particular quote is me; it's from the first post in this thread.
What gets me about the white background is that it would have been the work of a few seconds to make it less glaring and it wasn't done. I can understand the other features taking time but that one is so easilly fixable and yet it hasn't been.
What gets me about the white background is that it would have been the work of a few seconds to make it less glaring and it wasn't done. I can understand the other features taking time but that one is so easilly fixable and yet it hasn't been.
I agree, I could look at the source code right now and find it in just a few minutes and fix it (if I had access to the files on their server), so seriously take a few minutes and find the line that needs to be changed already.