A real Forum for D

[Vladimir Panteleev]

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:06:06 +0200, Unknown W. Brackets  
<usefirstnameinstead-newsgroup at unknownbrackets.org> wrote:

> 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.

Aren't you contradicting yourself? All merits of using some alternatives  
may become fully apparent only after extended use, and attempts to switch  
back. Productivity gains are often hard to quantify, thus reports of such  
can be easily confused with bias (it goes both ways, of course).

I don't see how you can objectively say that linear conversations are less  
"artificial" than threaded ones.

> 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.

What cost? Perhaps this is all about suboptimal UIs?

> 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.

I just tried the threaded mode. Compared to a real newsreader, it is also  
a joke.

> 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.

It does not. Major forum software, including SMF (I just checked the  
source), store the last post ID that you've seen in a thread.

> 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.

Why do you even mention topics? It's clear as day that major forums save  
which threads you haven't read in their entirety, but not individual posts.

> I'll note that I use Gmail proudly and often these days.

Be careful with that pride. They say it blinds.

-- 
Best regards,
  Vladimir                            mailto:vladimir at thecybershadow.net