I hate clicking links and waiting for pages to download. I'm a generally impatient type. That's why I've always loved this forum, with 100 posts on a page you can flick down it in seconds - rather than other fora which require multiple clicking.
IHAQ was great for that too. Now each little question requires its own thread - and click. I personally don't view this as an improvement.
Just my ha'pennyworth.
Last edited by: car4play on Wed 24 Feb 10 at 12:05
|
|
No its not, 6 is too many.
|
|
No. One has to go looking for stuff.
|
>> IHAQ was great for that too. Now each little question requires its own thread -
>> and click. I personally don't view this as an improvement.
The logic behind it is that each question gets its own thread.
With IHAQ (and Comp Related), people had to remember to click on the topmost post if they had a new question. Some people didn't and it required a cumbersome move technique where the question had to be moved out of the IHAQ thread, and then stitched back into IHAQ using a 6 digit refefence number. On the odd occasion moving a post would result in it being lost in cyberspace.
Also, by not having a dedicated IHAQ thead means that separate volumes no longer have to be created when they reach approx 100 posts (another cumbersome operation).
From experience, we know that people don't like change, but this really is only a minor one.
Webmaster.
Last edited by: webmaster on Wed 24 Feb 10 at 11:51
|
Again I'm at odds with most... well 3 to 1 so far.
I like the seperate topics as I found the old IHAQ messy when one was closed up and a new one started perhaps in the middle of several ongoing topics. It's easy to scan this for things you might be able to help on and ignore the rest.
|
|
Regarding the main headers... and it's just a personal thing... I'd lose the introductions forum and move computers into non-motoring. Leaving 3 main forums would make it easier to look round.
|
>> Leaving 3 main forums would make it easier to look round.
Whilst regulars might like it all in one place because it is easier to see all posts in one place, we also need to think of the usefulness of the site information. We believe this is vital for attracting new people and for the ultimate survival of the site/forum.
|
|
I am going to change my mind, I does seem to be a more logical layout. Oh dear that is a feminine trait, do I have to put my fog lights on? Blue LED's are out of the question!
|
It's fine like this for me but only if we can have a notification of new topics in the forum index.
If not, then the old way for me too!
Pat
|
|
Another problem there was a giant archive on HJ of old IHAQs - no way to see what was in the 350 odd threads in the archive - A duvet day job was to catalogue these - anyway never happen now.
|
At the risk of losing my Luddite credentials, I think this is an improvement.
But no more sub forums, please.
I would bin the introduce yourself one and just have discussion, technical, non-motoring and computer.
|
>> At the risk of losing my Luddite credentials I think this is an improvement.
>>
>> But no more sub forums please.
>>
>> I would bin the introduce yourself one and just have discussion technical non-motoring and computer.
>>
I agree, I find this layout preferable to the IHAQ one big thread way of doing things.
|
After advising against this approach in an earlier post, I can see that it does look quite neat, and if it involves less moderator effort then it must be a good thing.
I still suspect that responses might not be as immediate or numerous as they might have been using the old system. But on the whole, it seems like an improvement.
|
>> Also by not having a dedicated IHAQ thead means that separate volumes no longer have
>> to be created when they reach approx 100 posts (another cumbersome operation).
Unfortunately Webby me old mate we can't avoid this totally. eg, Unusual sightings, F1, speed & cameras.
|
|
I'd hoped that there would be very very few complaints about the site/forum layout. Personally, I'm just grateful that Car4play has been set up, and so quickly too.
|
Me too, but I'm a little sad at seeing it become an exact clone of the backroom.
Maybe Ling does have a point:)
It's a bit like playing catch in here at the moment, make a post and try and find it again after 5 minutes.
Maybe the Mods have had 'tidy minds' for too long and are scared of change?
Pat
|
|
I've moved nothing ;-) And personally I agree that things could do with changing a bit.
|
I know you haven't welshy, it's the other bloke with his feather duster:)
Pat
|
I'm against mods moving stuff loads but we are in a settling period which has gone pretty well all things considered. The fact that the large amount of chat about the running of the forum and modding standards has all been good natured, even including the measured responses to Ling's very direct posts, looks good for the future.
The old forum's zero tolerance on discussion of such things was too heavy handed. Once a forum settles nicely there is almost no discussion about such things and when a poster does feel the need it's often quite appropriate (as long as it's polite) for it to be seen and responded to in open forum by both mods and other members.
You should be happy with the feather duster Pat.... there was a mod many years ago in the other place who was happy with nothing less than a military flame thrower.
|
>> You should be happy with the feather duster Pat.... there was a mod many years
>> ago in the other place who was happy with nothing less than a military flame
>> thrower.
Yes, if you mean he of the four initials after his name, but it was incredibly entertaining to read his put downs, as long as you weren't on the receiving end. I still have some filed away for posterity I think!
|
I like the feather duster, it's vast improvement here and I have a vision of the mods, all about 21 stone with hairly legs dancing around in tutu's:)
I'm off to post about cats and gardening now in Technical!!
Pat
|
"...the mods, all about 21 stone with hairly legs dancing around in tutu's"
Funny it should be you that said that Pat........ :-) :-)
btw I was a bit late to the scene but I thought I saw a decision in our coffee room (the broom cupboard, as it is named!) to not have the IHAQs, CRQ and stuff like Motor Racing thread. They are relatively high maintenance for the mods, after all - and we wouldn't want too much work would we? However I think they mostly got started by members, and once they were there it was easier to coalesce (!!) the other threads into them.
Whatever, it's early days, there is a conscious behind-the-scenes decision that it will be different, so don't assume it will always be as it is now.
|
yes, whatever happened to Mark(RLBS)?
and the one who ate too many pork pies
|
|
Well I guess the mods would know but I was 90% convined he was still about from a posting style I noticed time and again from one HJ forum member!
|
Mark (RLBS) became No FM2R and then left. And Fenlander (MM?) is mistook, not been here (or there) in a million years.
And the guy with the Alfa Romeo tractor on the South Coast is still rotund, still on the south coast and still eating pork pies.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 8 Jul 10 at 11:01
|
Hello!
That tractor must be getting on a bit...
|
|
Its wearing better than the driver.
|
>>And Fenlander (MM?) is mistook, not been here (or there) in a million years.
Fenlander=MM. Indeed.
Sorry to attribute a similar style... big on info and just a tad bad tempered.... to you M :-). I hope all is well with you and yours.
|
|
I prefer the current method of IHAQ rather than the old HJ method.
|
...I prefer the current method of IHAQ...
So do I - the non-motoring forum has been something of a triumph for this site.
|
|
Seems some people like change after all ;o)
|
>> ...I prefer the current method of IHAQ...
>>
>> So do I - the non-motoring forum has been something of a triumph for this
>> site.
>>
Me too, I find it much easier to find a recent topic here than buried half way down a long long IHAQ thread on the BR.
|
|
I see they've renamed their IHAQ thread to be general non-motoring discussion too now. We tried telling them to do that at relaunch but they ignored us.... now they've copied C4P. Flattery?
|
whos got a flat flattery
oh i thought it said battery
............
|
>> but they ignored us....
Despite the title change the BR members are ignoring it too.
|
Thread drift is fine, but having multiple topics in one thread is bonkers. Much better in this format.
Lumping say F1 into one thread is OK as it's really an ongoing discussion. One IHAQ thread never worked for me, and I frequently skipped it - often when I looked there's be an ongong discussion on a topic that just didn't interest me.
|
same with me Manatee
i was having this discushion why only yesterday in my local ish newish pub with bought in books by the truckload to give it a vision of oldism
i mentioned that how many books have bombed because the title was boring
|
|
Me too. I always found IHAQ unusable, so I seldom even looked at it. Not everything in NM interests me, of course, but I can easily skip what doesn't and I've found a lot there that does, so the new format gets my vote.
|
|
One of the many reasons why we kept on asking for new posts to be tagged onto the topmost post and to be given a new title in the IHAQ threads was so that when viewed in threaded view you could see each separate new question laid out which made it easier to see if there was anything of interest there and to follow it more easily. The very early IHAQ and Comp Related threads didn't follow this protocol - if you were to look at them (best of luck finding them with the forum search over there) you'll see what I mean.
|
"I see they've renamed their IHAQ thread to be general non-motoring discussion too now. We tried telling them to do that at relaunch but they ignored us.... now they've copied C4P. Flattery?"
No - I suggested the change some time ago and I'm glad it's now happened: as one here, it's good to encourage general discussion even if it's not asking a question. People will get used to it - everything takes time. Definitely better than the old IHAQ format: new posters would get the procedure wrong and the mods would have to correct it. I'm relieved not to have to do that.
Last edited by: Avant on Thu 8 Jul 10 at 22:05
|
I think you'll find I asked them to change it as soon as they relaunched (and before you were a mod Avant).... do you want to see the emails ;-) But as usual they knew best so ignored the mods.
In fact, even though it was named incorrectly, I had a sticky (recently removed) that said to post in different threads.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 8 Jul 10 at 22:19
|
I am a convert to the new format.
|
|
This is much better than having loads of topics under one thread, at least you can read the ones that might be of interest, and you are able to help in, without sifting through all the others.
|
I think this arrangements is way better.
We only used the old "single topic" approach because HJ kept deleting everything not motoring related The only compromise I could get him to agree to was that he woudln't delete it if we kept it all in one thread.
I don't think we ever thought it was the right way to go.
|
Is this an improvement over IHAQ? - Old Navy
