A real Forum for D

[Unknown W. Brackets]

Walter,

Well, having authored web forum software, I suppose I'll make a few 
remarks here.  I seem to have gotten hit by a stray "forum software 
writers (that's me) just don't get it."

1. Well, I get threads, I really do.  I understand their usefulness, and 
how sometimes it's beneficial to completely ignore a branch - for 
example, someone reporting an issue with a release on FreeBSD, that 
doesn't affect me and I don't care about.

That said, I must say it's a relatively artificial form of conversation. 
  It's annoying, quite frankly.  It's not that I don't get it, I just 
don't *like* it.

I'm not alone.  Tons of other people have abandoned this artificial 
communication format, not because they're stupid or "the masses" or they 
don't get it, but simply because the cost benefit is not, generally there.

Nevertheless, I'll point out that vBulletin does, in fact, have this 
feature, although I can't even remember that last time I saw someone use 
it.  Instead they often try "hybrid" mode, which is a joke.  If you saw 
that, you'd assume no one gets it.

2. I can't speak to all forum software, since several years ago I'm 
pretty sure they just remembered the latest timestamp of the latest post 
when you last visited.

But the forum software I was involved in, SMF, absolutely stores more 
detail than just the topic being read or not.  And I'd imagine 
vBulletin, as well, stores it per post in threaded mode.

3. Ignoring the comments about email replies (since they are easy 
fodder), and returning to the original: many forum softwares (including 
my own) due indeed provide a way to easily see which posts or topics you 
have or have not read.

In fact, for a long while, I'm pretty sure SMF was the *only* one that 
remembered topics you hadn't read between visits.  Maybe FUDforum too. 
Now a bunch do it, I think.  Possibly all.

(cross-branch reply)

I'll also mention that most any web forum software does, in fact, have 
authenticated moderation controls, easy to use ones in fact.

They could use client SSL certificates as security (RSA keys would be a 
hard fit, I'd suggest a VPN with an authenticated IP range in that 
case), but generally browser interfaces to this aren't ideal, and 
difficult to transfer or recover.  That said, it's not that hard to use, 
and I've wondered myself why it's not done more often.

(another cross-branch reply that is useful in context...)

Anyway, an NNTP bridge to a forum could certainly be written, and I'm 
relatively sure there are already some available.  Unfortunately, it's 
typical that they succumb to the same problems as #1, especially if the 
interface doesn't enforce threading.

I'll note that I use Gmail proudly and often these days.  I'm happy that 
it has adopted a *linear conversation format*, which makes sense to me, 
works well, and simplifies reviewing past and future conversations.  I'm 
not aware of any threaded message display format, despite the fact the 
emails are ostensibly (though note cross replies and such) threaded.

And let's be honest.  When people ask for web based forums, they're not 
talking about putting a threaded interface up.

-[Unknown]


On 11/27/2011 10:12 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 11/27/2011 5:40 PM, Jude wrote:
>> //quote cause I'm lazy
>> Those are all desirable properties. But the forum software I've seen
>> throws out what's good about NNTP news forums:
>>
>> 1. Threaded view
>> 2. Being able to mark messages as "read"
>> 3. Being able to quickly scan read vs unread
>> //end quote
>>
>> 1. Forums can have threaded view too,
>
> Generally, they suck. They just don't get what a threaded view is.
> Newsreaders solved this problem decades ago. A thread is not a topic.
> It's a view showing who replied to which message. Click to expand at
> each branching point, click to contract, click to see a particular
> message. At each point, you can see which messages you've read, and
> which you haven't.
>
> I've never, ever seen forum software that can do that. If there is one,
> point me to an example.
>
> Every newsreader does this.
>
>
>> 2. I thought that that was pretty standard for forums? Highlighting
>> for threads you've seen and threads you haven't... not for individual
>> messages, but the last number (25 or so) messages you've seen.
>
> Again, the forum software writers just don't get it. It has to be per
> message. Why? So in a larger thread, you can instantly see what is read
> and what isn't. This is NOT equivalent to a chronological sort. I do not
> read threads linearly.
>
>> 3. click the nice little subscribe to thread button and it tells you
>> if anyone else submits something.
>
> Sorry, but that's not it. I want to see if someone replied to a
> *particular* message.
>
>> These are all things that forums have had for a while...
>
> I've used many forum softwares. They all just DON'T GET IT.