| |
| Author |
Message |
|
| lady wakasa |
 Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:04 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
Joe Vitus wrote: Lady,
The Times offered no more selections than we do. There was The Lobby, Current Film, Home Viewing and sometimes a specialty forum. That's it.
Not sure about this - I was pretty sure, for example, there was something about actors.
Quote: I've found discussions on sites that break down files by specific films to be very limited.
Joe - that's your experience, but there are sites that have done it. I posted one as an example, but there are others. I'm not making this up, and it's not an opinion. It can work. The question here is more whether that's what we want here.
Quote: The only difference that we would experience with a newer version of this template would be an improvement of the search engine, but as I said once you know what choice to make the search engine is incredibly easy.
No, this is definitely not true. There are a lot of under-the-covers technical upgrades that make maintaining and enhancing the site easier - which is something *you'd* only indirectly run into, but it is something that Lorne and the moderators would appreciate. And added functionality goes beyond search; I only used that as an example (because it's been a while since I read through the phpbb enhancements) - registering / signup would be another one. I am still at work (and I will be for a while) and would like to go home at some point, so I'm not going to look it all up; but if you want to look it up you can go to Wikipedia or phpbb.com - although it's heavily technical and I don't think you'll get a fair amount of it.
And you're assuming that newbies are going to find enough to keep them interested long enough to figure out the search. For somewhat technically savvy people, it probably won't take long. For people less so? I don't think you can just assume that. And there is no correlation between interest in film and technical proficiency.
Quote: Yes, people claim "I've already posted about it." Such a comment is invariably followed by a restatement of their original post. Does it turn people off to read "I've already posted on this"?
If the posts are pretty much within a few minutes to an hour, it's not a big deal. If someone posts Friday, someone comes back Sunday night and says, "oh I posted about that two months ago" (perhaps inclined to find the link, perhaps not) and then the original poster finds that post on Tuesday - and then has to find the two-months-ago post because the second person didn't feel inclined - doesn't work so much.
See, Joe - this kind of stuff makes it harder for people to get around. You and I may be fine with it, or live with it, because we're used to this. But for anyone who's new, or who's been to a board where it *is* done more smoothly, they have no incentive to stay around. Why go to a clunky site if it's very easy to find another where things are set up better?
Quote: Are the people saying that themselves offended that they were passed over before. I suspect the answer is "no" in both cases.
No - Billy was a little (LITTLE) miffed in the past month about a review of his someone skipped over. Other people have been more miffed because they feel like they weren't being listened to. You can go back through the posts to see that. |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| lady wakasa |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:07 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
Syd wrote: lady wakasa wrote: One other thing: we are always having people post their impressions of a film, and someone else comes up and says "but I posted about that last week / last month / when I saw it last year." So there is an issue with discontinuity of discussions even among us.
By the way, you can use the url tag to link to the earlier review, which helps.
But you have to be motivated enough to go back and find your earlier posting. And someone who wasn't at the original conversation still has to hop around to the original, then go through the posts to see what other people might've replied. Within a few days, not a problem. But if the movie came out in NYC six months before it makes it to Melody - that's not as easy. |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| lady wakasa |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:13 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
Melody wrote: Lady, you raise good points. Let me ask this: If we revamp the site, will we lose the content in the process, or is there a way to somehow transfer and/or archive?
Yes - you basically back up both the forum "shell" and the database with the comments, then do the upgrade (overwrite the forum "shell'). The trick (as long as the upgrade was done properly %^D) is handling a database with five years worth of comments... which will be HUGE. However, backing up is your friend, so if things get screwed up you should be able to restore if things go badly.
It would also mean that the site itself would be down for a few hours to a day. (And there's an option to shut off access, so that's easily done.)
Okay, I really need to get back to work... |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:21 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Lady,
When have you EVER known someone to just write "I posted on that" and leave the other person hanging? It never happens. Sometimes they provide a link to the earlier post. Sometimes they re-state their response. How can this be difficult for any newcomer?
As for the improvements of the template that would make things better/easier for the moderators, can you give an example that would make newcomers feel more welcome?
It is my experience that"subject specific" folders do not lead to complex conversation. That you can link a specific website where they do, does not make that the norm. So, in a sense, you are simply voicing an opinion. Nor does it insure that getting rid of our current format (which does promote intelligent discussion) will assure us the other format will do the same. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Melody |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:30 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2242
Location: TX
|
In MY opinion, it's been MY experience that specialty folders work, i.e. Brian de Palma in Film or East of Eden in Books. The BdP forum allows for a wide-ranging discussion of his films and other topics generated from the discussion, however vaguely related to BdP. It also keeps out chatter about unrelated films other folks are watching, which wouldn't happen if the BdP discussion were happening in the Couch section.
ATTENTION LORNE & THE MODS:
I say the proof's in the pudding. Why don't we give it a shot, say a month-long experiment, where we make Current Film: November a large heading and then have subtopics titled with the name of the film? Let's see how it works and/or doesn't work. At least we'll have a better understanding of the mechanics of such an option. |
_________________
My heart told my head: This time, no. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| lady wakasa |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:45 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
Joe Vitus wrote: Lady,
When have you EVER known someone to just write "I posted on that" and leave the other person hanging? It never happens.
Not true:
- Example 1
- Example 2
- Example 3 (Marc's post under Billy's)
(Not picking on anyone, this started from a recent comment I remembered someone making and went to checking pages from there. Also I know there definitely have been people who have been frustrated because they mentioned a movie and someone came up a month or two later, unintentionally ignoring their posts - but I'm not going to spend an hour going through the search to find those)
Quote: Sometimes they provide a link to the earlier post. Sometimes they re-state their response. How can this be difficult for any newcomer?
Because of the amount of time that might have passed between the original post and the newer post, and whether someone's got the time to find the original link. Sometimes it's an issue of access to a showing; sometimes people catch things on DVD instead of the theater. Amd I'm not sure there's anyone who's going to go through six months of posts to see what conversation came up after someone first saw a movie. And that's for current film - it would basically be impossible to do with Couch.
Quote: As for the improvements of the template that would make things better/easier for the moderators, can you give an example that would make newcomers feel more welcome?
Not for the next few days, Joe. That's why I supplied the links.
Quote: It is my experience that"subject specific" folders do not lead to complex conversation. That you can link a specific website where they do, does not make that the norm. So, in a sense, you are simply voicing an opinion. Nor does it insure that getting rid of our current format (which does promote intelligent discussion) will assure us the other format will do the same.
First of all, take a step back, Joe. I'm not getting on your case, I'm coming up with reasons why we should think about redoing what we have now. And this is the conversation we - as a site - need to have. If we collectively decide not to do it, that's fine. But I believe we should, and I'm giving examples why.
You implied it was impossible to have a site where categorizing by movies would work. I gave you an example where it did work. This isn't about averages, and it's not guaranteed we're going to get this right; after all, there are no guarantees in life. But I still say that the status quo will likely shut down the site in the long run.
I will also point out that Mirgin said she was having problems understanding the site. She later said she was willing to stick with it. Not everybody is going to do that. |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| lady wakasa |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:53 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
Melody wrote: ATTENTION LORNE & THE MODS:
I say the proof's in the pudding. Why don't we give it a shot, say a month-long experiment, where we make Current Film: November a large heading and then have subtopics titled with the name of the film? Let's see how it works and/or doesn't work. At least we'll have a better understanding of the mechanics of such an option.
Hey, Melody - I think it's better to have a little more conversation about this before implementing: around a lobby equivalent, setting up the topics, etc, and making sure a few more people know. I don't remember who all the mods are; but Wade, for example, has a lot of RL stuff going on and won't be back for awhile. But maybe a day or two more input, then setting up for December? Even starting in two weeks. I just don't think one day's enough to get all this set up.
Another issue - maybe plan on doing it for December, freezing the current version; then if everyone wants to revert back, freezing the December forum and reopening the current version. (Freezing means what we do with the old Blanche and specialty fora.) It's a bear to move discussions around, and I'm not sure if you can do it with this version (i.e., the new setup can't be incorporated back into the current if we have to revert). |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I'm with Joe on this one. There is very little wrong with this forum. And it surely isn't complicated.
If you want to see complicated and BLOATED, just visit Facebook. Why people are reluctant to post here is a bit of a mystery to me. My only thought on the matter is that they are skittish. If they just don't like the posters they see on here, OK, but if they are just too sensitive, then that's the way they are, I don't think we have to change to meet their criterion.
Whatever we do, I'm not going to change just to conform. I like to see new people but that doesn't mean there will be a new me.
Anyway, Joe is right. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:40 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Gary and Joe's points are well made. And I don't want to add to any confusion. But just so you both know, the only reason we're still discussing this, I think, is because of what Lorne said. To paraphase: He said the site would indeed die if we did not make some changes and get some new people in here.
With that in mind, I don't think we need to make huge changes. And frankly I'm not sure why new people find our site as it is, confusing. Perhaps it's just the nature of a salon type of board, rather than some of the other message boards some people are used to. I am fine with both: Changing the layout of the site if need be and leaving it alone. I would love to hear from Lorne on the matter. But I think Lady has been wonderful in contributing so much.
I also have to stick up for our search function. I tend to see movies later than others so I always begin by looking up previous posts using this function. It may take a little getting used to but I've never have a problem with it. I often do this with older movies as well. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:00 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
lady wakasa wrote: Joe Vitus wrote: Lady,
When have you EVER known someone to just write "I posted on that" and leave the other person hanging? It never happens.
Not true:
- Example 1
- Example 2
- Example 3 (Marc's post under Billy's)
(Not picking on anyone, this started from a recent comment I remembered someone making and went to checking pages from there. Also I know there definitely have been people who have been frustrated because they mentioned a movie and someone came up a month or two later, unintentionally ignoring their posts - but I'm not going to spend an hour going through the search to find those)
Actually EVERY example here proves my case, not yours. In every instance, the person either re-states their opinion or provides a link |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:04 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Lady,
I don't think you're getting on my case, and I'm sorry if my posts are reading as if I do. But I think film specific folders generally don't lead to intellegient conversations, so whether they can or not in certain instances, I don't want to risk losing the set-up that we've got, which has already proved that it leads to intelligent conversation.
And if the updated version of this site helps the moderators, I've no problem at all with updating, if the moderators feel it would make their job easier. So far, I have not heard that any complaints. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:30 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Marj,
To be fair, I think what Lorne said was that if we didn't increase membership, we would not attract ads, and that without either ads or donations, the place will die.
Which to me is an entirely hypothetical statement, because we get enough people to pay the costs every year, so there's no worry about the site dying. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:38 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
I want to follow up on Marc's exit post, because I missed it the first time around (other posts had come up since) and I'm really bothered by it. Obviously, I'd like to hear his own response, but I don't know if he's still reading, really plans to leave forever, or is keeping up and willing to discuss it further. If he were still around I'd address the post to him, but doing so right not might be futile. So I'm just addressing it to everyone.
As far as I can tell, from the series of posts over the past few weeks that have lead up to the final one, this is the situation: Marc thinks his Facebook friends are really cool and rockin' and we aren't. So to Marc, this place would only remain interesting if it were packed with his cool and rockin' friends. But since he loves us, it's okay for us to stick around (thanks so much). Marc wanted to redo this site from head to toe if necessary to please his cool and rockin' friends because it is not cool and rockin' enough for them as it is. When his cool and rockin' friends checked this place out, they didn't find it cool and rockin' so they didn't post. And if his new cool and rockin' friends aren't going to hang out here, he's not letting himself get left behind with the squares. And it's "adios."
I feel like the high school guy whose friend just got onto the football team and suddenly doesn't want to hang out anymore. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:32 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Joe Vitus wrote: Marj,
To be fair, I think what Lorne said was that if we didn't increase membership, we would not attract ads, and that without either ads or donations, the place will die.
Which to me is an entirely hypothetical statement, because we get enough people to pay the costs every year, so there's no worry about the site dying.
Joe,
You're closer to right than I was. I scrolled back and found the post in which he said without more members, we'd die as we've been doing, from attrition.
But we don't attract ads. We're already going to place them on the site. Hopefully, in time, those ads will attract some money. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Melody |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:40 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2242
Location: TX
|
Lady, frankly I'm exhausted just reading the last few pages of BTC. I've posted my input and my idea for an experiment. You say it's premature and we need more discussion. That's cool, but I honestly don't see where several more days of hand-wringing and arguing over minutiae is going to help matters.
And now with Joe poking the bear, this place is about to degenerate into something I have no interest in being a part of. "Intelligent discussion" indeed. |
_________________
My heart told my head: This time, no. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
