Page 2 of 2

Re: Proposal: move or abolish the active subforums

Posted: 2008-12-07 03:44pm
by RogueIce
Destructionator XIII wrote:You see a new post indicated in the Senate. You assume it is in the HoC, so you skip to it. You scroll down and see a few new posts. You read the interesting ones, then hit mark forums read to clear out the uninteresting ones. Meanwhile, there actually was a new post in the Senate, and you missed it entirely.
I don't know what funky setup or board theme you're using, but that's not how it works. You go to the subforum, click mark forums read, it doesn't affect the parent forum at all. Those new posts will still be shown as unread. Even if you're in the parent forum it's two seperate links; clicking mark forums read for the parent forum won't affect the subforum, and vice-versa if you use the link for the subforum in the parent forum. I do it all the time without problem.

In the end, I really don't think it's worth the fuss people are making. Yes, a post in a subforum can give a "false positive" but with phpBB3 it's fairly easy to deal with. You see the unread posts indicator, you go to the parent forum (since you don't for whatever reason care about the subforum) scroll down, see no new posts, you can click on a link to mark the subforum as read right in the parent forum. If you're interested in the subforum, you just head there.

In the end, it's down to whether the minor inconvenience of the above outweighs having even more parent forums displayed on the main page than we do now. Which, as mentioned, is already a bit and there are plenty who would rather not see it grow and have to do even more scrolling than they do now (take in to consideration those of us in usergroups or who otherwise see nonpublic forums) since we don't all have high resolution, super widescreen HD monitors and whatnot.

So your solution to your particular brand of inconvenience is to introduce a whole new inconvenience to a new subset of people? Unless there is more to your arguments than "I don't like it" but I, to be honest, haven't seen that yet.

Re: Proposal: move or abolish the active subforums

Posted: 2008-12-07 04:22pm
by Bob the Gunslinger
Destructionator, I have a solution. After you post in the House of Commons or Senate, instead of checking for new posts immediately and then shaking your fist when the one new post you saw turns out to be in the other subforum, why don't you wait about 10 minutes? In 10 minutes, both the Senate and the House of Commons should have new posts in them, so you can read something new no matter where you click.

Seriously, are you just hitting "refresh" every ten seconds?

[Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 04:38am
by Rawtooth
This is just something minor, but I would like to propose a renaming of the STGOD subforum. While there are STGOD's currently on-going, there are other topics I feel could be properly located in said forum with little trouble. Namely I'm think of Let's Plays, such as the Oregon Trail by Instant Sunrise as well as the numerous Dwarf Fortress threads that have sprouted in G&C. There have also been at least two Dark Heresy games that are ongoing in the STGOD forum with their only connection to the forum title being that they are role-playing.

If we were to rename the subforum, I would vote towards "Interactive games" unless a more appropriate title is discovered.

Like I said, something minor but I felt worth mentioning.

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 05:07am
by The Duchess of Zeon
I think this is pointless, since STGOD is just an SD.net-community specific term for interactive games, and anyone who's a regular poster should get that meaning inherent in the use of the term, which is nonsensical otherwise, "Structured The Good Old Days" being otherwise incomprehensible.

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 05:20am
by Rawtooth
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:I think this is pointless, since STGOD is just an SD.net-community specific term for interactive games, and anyone who's a regular poster should get that meaning inherent in the use of the term, which is nonsensical otherwise, "Structured The Good Old Days" being otherwise incomprehensible.
Why should we keep a term that is both not entirely correct, as evidenced by things other than STGODs in afore-mentioned subform, as well as acts as a further barrier to an interested new party? That is why I'm just suggesting a renaming of said forum to something entirely different than "STGOD role-play games", and I definately do not support "Structured The Good Old Days" as that is incomprehensible as you mentioned.

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 05:28am
by The Duchess of Zeon
Rawtooth wrote:
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:I think this is pointless, since STGOD is just an SD.net-community specific term for interactive games, and anyone who's a regular poster should get that meaning inherent in the use of the term, which is nonsensical otherwise, "Structured The Good Old Days" being otherwise incomprehensible.
Why should we keep a term that is both not entirely correct, as evidenced by things other than STGODs in afore-mentioned subform, as well as acts as a further barrier to an interested new party? That is why I'm just suggesting a renaming of said forum to something entirely different than "STGOD role-play games", and I definately do not support "Structured The Good Old Days" as that is incomprehensible as you mentioned.

Because it's part of the quirky personality of the board, without which there wouldn't be very much reason to post here. The title should of course, explicitly in the forum description, be made clear to not constrain what people post there. If it's an actual game to be played through that format, then it's welcome, whereas G&C primary is for talking about games. There, intro covers it (and if it doesn't, it should), bam, we're done. No need to change the name of the forum.

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 05:32am
by Stark
So it should have an inaccurate name for 'tradition' and then include other text explaining the name shouldn't be taken seriously? How mendacious. I had no idea there was anything other than STGODs in there because I think STGODs are totally retarded and so I never go in there. Whoops.

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 05:49am
by The Duchess of Zeon
Stark wrote:So it should have an inaccurate name for 'tradition' and then include other text explaining the name shouldn't be taken seriously? How mendacious. I had no idea there was anything other than STGODs in there because I think STGODs are totally retarded and so I never go in there. Whoops.
Just because we debate rationally is no reason for us to engage in aggressive rationalization of all other aspects of the board. Particularly if they cause a chuckle for a few people. I mean, it's not really a big deal either way, but sometimes just seeing STGOD makes me smile, and remember days when Phong's spaceship armed Sailor Scouts were battling with stolen Fifth Imperium Planetoids and the John Company ran a local galactic cluster...

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 08:27am
by Grandmaster Jogurt
Why not just have the actual STGODs labeled as STGOD, rather than the entire subforum? This sounds like naming the entire History subforum "RAR!" because it's a bit of quirky board tradition even though it only covers a fraction of the actual content of the subforum.

If you just label the individual threads, you keep the traditional naming for nostalgia's sake while still letting that subforum be more clearly named. It's win-win.

Re: [Proposal] Rename STGOD subforum

Posted: 2008-12-09 08:28am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
Could we simply adopt this "If it ain't bloody broken, don't fix it" stance? It's rather superfluous to just go rename a forum which if by anything were about STGODs.

Re: Proposal: move or abolish the active subforums

Posted: 2008-12-09 10:33am
by Coyote
Merged the "Move or Abolish Active Subforums" topic with the "Rename STGODS" topic, since they both deal with sub-forum policies.

Renaming STGODS because one or two people finds the name confusing seemed somewhat "fluffy bunny" to warrant a whole thread. :wink: