Discussion Thread for new Community Forum Structure

[bobpullen]

Quote from: Be3G

I've just twigged something: shortening the descriptions will have absolutely no effect on the amount of vertical space used whatsoever – take a look at the Business Users' Forum to see what I mean.

We're considering tweaking the CSS too Thomas.

[Lurker]

I know it will surprise you all if I make an non-constructive jibe at this point, but hey, a change is as good as a rest...
I hope your consideration as to the tweaking of the CSS does not take as long as your consideration of the changes proposed to the layout.
See, told you it wasn't helpful. :P

[jelv]

Quote from: jelv

I'd suggest that Plusnet ought to look at the forum design before moaning about how many forums and how long the descriptions are, but I know if they did they'd solemnly promise on pain of death that they'd have something to show us in 3 weeks time and a year later we'd still be waiting.

::)

[LiamM]

Quote from: jelv

I'm rather beginning to think that Liam's Plusnetters wasn't such a bad idea!

That reminds me, I let the domain lapse.  Re-registered. :-)

[LiamM]

Quote from: jelv

The problem with the PUG forums is that they are hosted by Plusnet; we'd need to set up something totally independent. It's pretty obvious that there's more and more control freakery going on and you don't have to look far to see where it's coming from (I guess loads of people are familiar with the BT forms/Phorm saga).

Is this your main reason for not wanting to consider the PUG forums as an alternative?  As PUG we are always open to suggestions / ideas from the userbase and this applies to our website and our forums too.  We are 100% in control of the content including the forums, their structure and their layout.  We have shell access to our box and all the tomfoolery that goes with it and we manage the site totally ourselves - including updating SMF etc.. etc.. 
Admittedly, yes, Plusnet could if they wanted to switch us off easily (not sure what good that would do though).  But there would be nothing stopping us respringing elsewhere in that event - like on Plusnetters (for example).

[jelv]

The PUG forums are hosted on usertools.plus.net. Whilst I'd trust the people we've always had dealings with, I don't trust the goons parachuted in to Plusnet by BT. Anybody we saw the total censorship which was exercised on BT's own forums over a subject they didn't want discussed (hundreds of posts deleted which made any reference to the subject and usually the person making the post banned) will have severe concerns about a domain controlled by Plusnet. If we're going to start directing people to forums away from Community I'd be far happier if it was totally independent.

[avalon]

Quote from: Bob

Quote from: Be3G I've just twigged something: shortening the descriptions will have absolutely no effect on the amount of vertical space used whatsoever – take a look at the Business Users' Forum to see what I mean. We're considering tweaking the CSS too Thomas.

Why do I get the feeling this is the first the Mods are hearing about possible CSS changes. :(

[MauriceC]

@JELV
I understand your concern, but so far there are no indications that Plusnet have any designs on changing the way PUG operate.  UserTools may be split off by agreement so that those elements that Plusnet need to maintain (e.g. Exchange checker) fit more neatly into the Plusnet domain.
Let's not get over exercised by these potential changes to Community. Yet!
Maurice

[Be3G]

Quote from: me

Why do I get the feeling this is the first the Mods are hearing about possible CSS changes. :(

:-X
One thing I'd like to add to this thread by the way is that I'm not the only moderator who's annoyed with Plusnet over the recent turn of events – I've obviously been the most vocal about it, but I appear to not be the only one who's feeling he's had enough. I therefore feel I should warn people that progress on the restructuring might, unfortunately, slow down for the time being… I think we've all grown tired of being messed around, and it's going to take a lot to enthuse everybody to get on with the job again. There remain small attempts at progress, but it's not at all productive because due to Plusnet's decisions people are now going round in circles again discussing things that were originally sorted months ago. I certainly don't like deserting the community (in giving up on being involved myself), and I'm sure the other moderators feel the same way about their lack of enthusiasm – after all, we wouldn't be moderators if we were normally apathetic like this. Hope everybody understands. :(

[#10]

The other mods do not seem to be contributing to this thread - any reason why not? Would be nice to have other opinions - good and bad.
Meanwhile, although it might be frustrating, I hope that you all stick with it.

[bobpullen]

Quote from: MauriceC

UserTools may be split off by agreement so that those elements that Plusnet need to maintain (e.g. Exchange checker) fit more neatly into the Plusnet domain.

Yep, there was talk about moving the key elements over to the Community box (exchgange checker/gateway checker etc.) Colin was looking at this before he left.

Quote from: me

Quote from: Bob Quote from: Be3G I've just twigged something: shortening the descriptions will have absolutely no effect on the amount of vertical space used whatsoever – take a look at the Business Users' Forum to see what I mean. We're considering tweaking the CSS too Thomas. Why do I get the feeling this is the first the Mods are hearing about possible CSS changes. :(

Probably because it is and guess what? It was the first I knew about it as well because only minutes previously I'd sat down with one of the Content guys to make sure it was going to be possible. Why is *everything* being viewed with a Plusnet Vs. the Mods mentality?
It's silly! Yes, we've taken far too long to get the restructure out of the door. Yes, we've made some eleventh hour suggestions for change. But they are entirely that - suggestions. There was an element of doubt around this and I think Thomas and some of the other mods may have got the impression that we were presenting a final layout with no room for manoeuvre. That wasn't our intention and is being discussed elsewhere.
The way I see it, we have two versions of the forums.
1. A layout that had been agreed collectively pending some changes to the copy, and
2. A slightly revised layout based on the above after a few of us here thrashed it out in a meeting room last week.
If we can't collectively agree on a final version then it seems simple to me - As jelv has suggested lets widen the audience to see which of the two (or which bits from each) the Community would rather we settle with? I'm pretty sure the plan was to take the finalised version to the wider Community before implementing anyway and I wouldn't imagine having two outcomes to ponder instead of one is going to chuck too much of a spanner in the works?
The one thing I don't want to do is create an 'us Vs. the Mods mentality'. Whatever changes we make are going to be around for a while, so let's make sure we get them right.
On a final point, I really fail to see where all these inferences about us censoring/controlling the forums are coming from?! FWIW, I don't think the 'powers that be' have even seen the proposed restructure. TBH I doubt they will before it's implemented.
When we start unjustifiably banning people and telling the Mods what to do and how to behave then by all means shoot us down. There is absolutely no danger of this happening any time soon though!

[VileReynard]

Quote from: Bob

When we start unjustifiably banning people and telling the Mods what to do and how to behave then by all means shoot us down. There is absolutely no danger of this happening any time soon though!

If not soon, when?  ;D
Plusnet have already started telling the Mods not to interfere and how to behave - at least de facto.
I wonder what would happen if the Phorm debacle raised its ugly head again - what would Plusnet's response be?

[Mand]

Have we? When?
If the Phorm discussion reoccurs it will be business as usual in the forums, we'd be stupid to delete threads and such, which I think is the implication here?
I'd much rather get this discussion back on track, let's talk about the restructure, and make the changes that we can agree on to make the forums easier to manager and hopefully nicer to look at. :)

[Strat]

Quote from: poppy

The other mods do not seem to be contributing to this thread - any reason why not?

Speaking personally Thomas is voicing my very few concerns quite eloquently on two fronts ;), I therefore don't feel the need to add anything. :)

[#15]

The thing needs to be sorted - and soon if folk aren't to be discouraged and the forum deteriorate.
According to Bob there are two scenarios. Is it too much to hope that each one be presented to the members and voted on in the time-honoured way?
There are many very knowledgeable people on here, well up to deciding which is the best option I would think.