too many subforums

[coalminecanary]

But don't you see? The rather large list of moved topics means that it is NOT crystal clear to whomever posted those.

So the questions to the mods is: is it possible to have an active topics "page" that has the last 50 topics, presented in the format of
Topic Title/Starter - Last post time - Last poster - # replies

It could (and probably should) be separate from the main page.

THen everyone gets what they want. People can still browse by topic, or if they prefer having access to all at once, they can have more than just the last 10 active topics...

May I present to you a Hamilton discussion that covers a huge diversity of topics and does very well with just one category:
http://www.stillepost.ca/boards/index.php?board=8.0

[flar]

I never pay attention to the categories, but if we got rid of them and just had a single forum, it would no longer be the SSP:Local format.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

To me the subforums are pretty crystal clear.

This sounds like an is-ought problem. The subfora perhaps ought to be clear to the community, but your own evidence suggests that several people (myself included) are unclear on the categories.

Your options are: 1) to continue to expect that people ought to be able to figure it out, and to move threads more aggressively; or 2) to recognize that for whatever reason, the subfora are not actually as clear to the community as they are to you (perhaps because others are less intimately involved in the detailed operation of the forum) and to make such changes as are required to make them clear.

Web communities are successful to the extent that they respond to how users actually behave, not to how users ought to behave.

[markbarbera]

Is-Ought ethics theory applied to a discussion forum? That's giving its application a bit of an stretch.

I think the clarity of the subcategories is entirely dependant on the participant actually bothering to read the description of the subcategory before diving in to a discussion. It's not so much an inability understanding the SSP Local concept as it is a disregard to its structure. I would suggest that if a participant wished to use this forum, they should respect the intents of its creators. If they are unable (or unwilling) to do so, they should simply be politely asked to search out other platforms to satisfy their urge to express themselves.

I for one think there is too much of a leeway given to postings here as it is. Discussions run off-topic regularly here. I certainly would not want it redesigned to encourage mindless ramblings. There is enough online schizophrenia as it is without advancing towards online anarchy.



Is it really that hard to follow simple guidelines today?

[SteelTown]

My rule of thumb, if in doubt put it in the "Urban, Urban Design and Heritage Issues" section. We all pretty much discuss about urban issues.

I think the current set-up is simple enough. If you wish to have a single forum we should just go back to the old format and eliminate SSP:Local format.

As a compromise we could increase the active topic to 15 or 20

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

Your options are: 1) to continue to expect that people ought to be able to figure it out, and to move threads more aggressively;

I'll be stricter and relocate threads in the future. Whenever I do relocate a thread I'll make a note that it got relocated. Hopefully over time people will begin to understand the set up.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Is-Ought ethics theory applied to a discussion forum? That's giving its application a bit of an stretch.

I wouldn't say that. An ethical system, like a UI, is fundamentally a methodology of interaction. In articulating the is-ought problem, Hume was pointing out that if you wish to establish an interaction system, you must proceed based on how thing actually are rather than how you might wish they would be. His insight applies in any interaction system, as, say, the usability design movement has demonstrated empirically in decades of study. (Aside: it also explains why religious abstinence-based sex education fails to reduce teen sexual activity and why moral suasion-based energy conservation strategies fail to reduce energy consumption.)

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I think the clarity of the subcategories is entirely dependant on the participant actually bothering to read the description of the subcategory before diving in to a discussion.

If the system depends on users bothering to read the subcategory descriptions but users aren't willing to do so, then the system is broken and needs fixing. The users aren't here to accommodate SSP and the artifacts of its design; SSP is here to accommodates what its users want to do with it.

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I would suggest that if a participant wished to use this forum, they should respect the intents of its creators.

You've got it exactly backwards. If the creators of this forum wish to draw and retain users, they should respect the intents of its users and adjust the forum to accommodate what people want to do with it. (Within reason: the forum exists for its members to discuss urban issues, and it makes sense to preserve this raison d'être - but only in the context of allowing/encouraging users to do so in an intuitive manner that reflects what people want/are prepared to do.)

Again, a system in which users frequently post threads to the wrong subfora is a non-intuitive system. As Steve Krug famously put it, "don't make me think".

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

It's not so much an inability understanding the SSP Local concept as it is a disregard to its structure.

Or possibly the structure is considered inappropriate or unneccesary by a majority of the users...?

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I would suggest that if a participant wished to use this forum, they should respect the intents of its creators. If they are unable (or unwilling) to do so, they should simply be politely asked to search out other platforms to satisfy their urge to express themselves.

Uhh. this isn't meant to be a soap box for the users. This is a discussion. A community. If the intent of the creators is to host a community discussion then it is up to the creators to make the environment welcoming to such activity.

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Is it really that hard to follow simple guidelines today?

This isn't about morality and following rules. It's about making the discussion forum easier to use. It's really not that big a deal. All I suggested was that the "active threads" function was the most useful one, and that it should be expanded. And it seems like most of the people in this thread see things the same way.

I only questioned the divisions because there is clearly a lot of confusion about them - which totally makes sense because most of the topics we discuss cannot be so neatly categorized. They overlap the divisions.

But really, all I (we?) would really like is an expansion (or preferably, removal) of the limit of the length of the active threads section. A bonus would be to add a note about the last poster in each thread.

Originally Posted by SteelTown

My rule of thumb, if in doubt put it in the "Urban, Urban Design and Heritage Issues" section. We all pretty much discuss about urban issues.

Yet another argument that the other sections are extraneous!

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I think the current set-up is simple enough. If you wish to have a single forum we should just go back to the old format and eliminate SSP:Local format.

no... the old format was one thread. My argument is we need only one (or two) topics which is absolutely not the same thing. My desire is that we, at a minimum, investigate a separate "Active threads" page that lists the latest 50, or latest 100, or multiple pages of ALL the most recent threads.

Originally Posted by SteelTown

As a compromise we could increase the active topic to 15 or 20

THat would be a great start. And then if we could increase it to 50 and give it its own page, and add "last post by" then it will be even better :-)

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Hopefully over time people will begin to understand the set up.

We shouldn't have to cross our fingers and hope people eventually figure it out. It should be completely intuitive even for first time posters...

[SteelTown]

What I have proposed is to relocate the active topic section below the subforums, instead of the current setup where the active topics are above the subforums. Relocating the active thread section we could increase the number from 10 to 15 or 20.

This way you get both the long list of active topics and the subforums.

[SteelTown]

Just to give you an idea, I couldn't fit all the subforums......



Relocating the active topic below the subforums we could increase the number.

[Millstone]

^^^ boo-urns.

[SteelTown]

Millhouse, are they booing me?

[coalminecanary]

Having 20 active topics listed would be great. I am personally OK with them being at the bottom, but the top would be more convenient

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Millhouse, are they booing me?

YES

[crhayes]

They should put 20 at the top, but use Javascript to allow users to show/hide them like the other forum sections. I don't think they'd like this idea though because of the advertisements.

[omro]

Maybe, in the interests of democracy, we should put it to a vote through a poll run by the Mods?

Options being:

1) to increase the number of "Latest Active Threads" and leave the subforums as they are

2) to increase the number of "Latest Active Threads" and leave the subforums as they are and relocate the LAT list below the subforums.

3) to delete all the subforums and create a simple flat forum were all items for discussion are in the same place, regardless of underlying subcategory, and the "Latest Active Threads" list becomes irrelevant.

Other suggested reconfigurations to be added before creating the poll?

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by omro

Maybe, in the interests of democracy, we should put it to a vote through a poll run by the Mods?

Options being:

1) to increase the number of "Latest Active Threads" and leave the subforums as they are

2) to increase the number of "Latest Active Threads" and leave the subforums as they are and relocate the LAT list below the subforums.

3) to delete all the subforums and create a simple flat forum were all items for discussion are in the same place, regardless of underlying subcategory, and the "Latest Active Threads" list becomes irrelevant.

Other suggested reconfigurations to be added before creating the poll?

Include a fourth option - leave the forum unchanged.

[coalminecanary]

I think the ideal solution is to leave the main page as is but offer a secondary "Active threads" page that has as many as you want to show - i'd say 50. I know it's technically feasible to do, it's just a matter of who can/would do it...?

THen anyone who is really tied to the current setup can just ignore it, and those that want to browse without subforums can still do that. Only main downside is that threads will still have to be moved if people making brand new ones don't know where to put them...

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Include a fourth option - leave the forum unchanged.

We might get an MMP outcome then ;-)

[coalminecanary]

Here's one way
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=158887

[SteelTown]

First I have to see if this is possible with the admins, relocating the active topic and increasing the number of active topic. I'll keep you posted.