A real Forum for D

[Unknown W. Brackets]

Comments interpolated below.

-[Unknown]


On 11/29/2011 1:29 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> What I'm concerned about, is that based on your recommendation of
> vBulletin's threaded UI, you may have simply experienced poor UI?
>
> For example, vBulletin only dedicates a measly amount of screen space to
> the thread view...
>
> Another important element is keyboard navigation...

These are both very reasonable criticisms.  But, the size of the tree 
can be trivially increased (if installing it as software, and 
customizing the skin.)

For keyboard, some of the problems are handled by the browser (for 
example, spacebar and find-as-you-type is about all I need.)  But, I 
agree most web software (and indeed, SMF) could use better keyboard 
interaction.

> The analogy to speech only holds for as long as you assume that only one
> person is speaking at the same time. Threads often diverge in multiple
> unrelated conversations, often with a smaller subset of participants -
> something like a rowdy classroom. In linear views, the noise becomes
> annoying; moderators commonly have the responsibility to separate
> conversations that have diverged too much.

Well, I think a group of reasonable can self-moderate, to a large 
degree, and I've seen it happen.

I don't really think disorganization is a benefit, myself.  I think 
having a clear structure (ironically) to the conversation in a linear 
format is a benefit.

Also, since people who (very arguably) are more likely to self moderate 
are also the primary audience for newsgroups (being that less tech savvy 
people don't bother, typically), I don't really think it's a problem 
worth trying to solve.

That's kinda what I meant; experience with the linear format has shown 
me that these aren't really issues, and if they are, they'll be issues 
either way.

> Hmm... As opposed to ignoring sub-threads you're not interested about?

I've found the occurrence of sub threads I actually have no interest in 
whatsoever to be pretty low.  More importantly, when I don't read them, 
I'm often ill-informed, because I don't know about information that is 
actually relevant to me but was exposed in a leaf within a branch I ignored.

I'll note that I don't really care for things like Reddit/Slashdot, and 
usually use forums to discuss things like in these newsgroups: code, 
ideas, methodologies, issues/feedback, projects, etc.  Directed, 
interesting things.  Not just a free-for-all of thoughts on why a 
snail's shell was painted with bright colors by someone.  Those need 
threading.

> Well, as I mentioned earlier, this is not something that can be
> objectively argued about.

Sure, I agree.  Every human is biased in some way, and there exist 
separate solutions not only to refine and innovate and specialize, but 
also for the different ways people think and interact.

> It suffers from the same problems as other forums (does not remember
> individual read posts), but also has a rather clumsy UI.

Well, if it doesn't remember the actual posts, then that seems like a 
pretty useless threaded mode for sure, yes.  I could've sworn it did... 
but I think I used it in vBulletin 3 last, which I'm certain isn't the 
latest version.

>> I also can tell you from experience that if they were presented as
>> such, people would be confused and complain. Actually, I do agree lots
>> is wrong about forum software (and also about newsgroups too), but so
>> much is "set in stone" by how people are used to using it. This isn't
>> a new problem.
>
> You're contradicting yourself again... earlier you said:

No, I do not mean "people are used to non-threaded."  I mean, "people 
are used to not seeing something older than what they most recently read 
on forums."  I actually remember proposing storing "swiss cheese" thread 
read state, and being shot down.

That's just how UX works, though.  Once a (de facto) standard has been 
built, anything contrary to it is, by definition, wrong.  That's what I 
meant.

> But I agree that Joe Average doesn't need threading. Still, choice is
> good, as the presence of choice opens the doors for others to discover
> subjectively-superior ways of communication. :)

Sure, but I just don't think it's fair to say that people don't use 
threading because they "don't get it," or that people who want D 
discussion to happen with more modernly open means of involvement are 
"less techy."

-[Unknown]