New Messageboard format
- Thread starter RUchip
- Start date
give it a few weeks and everyone will forget what this old slow server looked like...hopefully it does not have the nasty advertisements like this one
I'd take anything over the old format. I'm gonna have to get an avatar. Identifying posters got a lot harder.
Typical systems design - change for the sake of change. You would figure if the programmers were such whizzes, they would let you look at the boards the old way or the new way. It's not rocket science. It just takes common sense. In my experience, most systems designers want to do their own thing and jettison what's been done before. Screw the people who are actually using the product.
My assessment:
1. The new interface takes up too much real estate per post. Scroll, baby, scroll. Can't wait for the copious "go back and reread my post" comments followed by "you posted?"
2. The quick link is gone when replying. I was always amazed how many posters just pasted a URL in their message rather than in the link box. Now you have to learn how to use the link button. What's that saying about a stitch in time?
3. No underlining or default motif change for links in the posted message. Seriously? See my comment about a stitch in time above.
4. Related to 3. above, you only see a link differentiated with underlining when you hover the mouse pointer over it. What Einstein came up with this? So, we have to hover over the whole message to see the links. Can't wait for the "didn't you read the links I posted?" admonishments followed by the "what links?" replies.
5. I looked to see if there are any options for the presentation. Still looking . . .
Color me unimpressed.
My assessment:
1. The new interface takes up too much real estate per post. Scroll, baby, scroll. Can't wait for the copious "go back and reread my post" comments followed by "you posted?"
2. The quick link is gone when replying. I was always amazed how many posters just pasted a URL in their message rather than in the link box. Now you have to learn how to use the link button. What's that saying about a stitch in time?
3. No underlining or default motif change for links in the posted message. Seriously? See my comment about a stitch in time above.
4. Related to 3. above, you only see a link differentiated with underlining when you hover the mouse pointer over it. What Einstein came up with this? So, we have to hover over the whole message to see the links. Can't wait for the "didn't you read the links I posted?" admonishments followed by the "what links?" replies.
5. I looked to see if there are any options for the presentation. Still looking . . .
Color me unimpressed.
Not a fan of the new format. I wouldn't suggest that this is new for the sake of new, but. . . .
Issues 3 and 4 seem like rookie mistakes. Not impressed either.
Issue 1 will be somewhat mitigated by the fact that no one can nest quotes an annoying number of times.
I'm with you, especially on item #1. Just checked some old pages I had saved and on the topic view page, I used to see 19 posts per full screen and now I only see 9 on the same laptop screen, as the list of topics takes up about twice as much vertical real estate per topic (see link).
Furthermore, for any individual post, the default vertical space for all the background crap (not including the actual post text) is 2.75", whereas the default vertical space in the old format was 1.25, so posts are now taking up more than twice as much space, vertically. Incredibly poor design, in my opinion - will be a huge waste of time scrolling twice as much. How the hell can people design these things and not think about scroll time/distance?
But I guess I at least get the long term thread storage that's been promised, which outweighs a lot of bad design, IMO - just wished they could've preserved the best elements of the old design or made the "look and feel" from the old site available as an option.
https://web.archive.org/web/20071113085528/http://rutgers.rivals.com/forum.asp?sid=&fid=642
Holy crap, didn't realize one can't quote a whole series of posts any more. I'm going to hate that, especially for long discussions where I like seeing all the points made in a conversation. I'm on other boards with the multiquote feature and it sucks
while I like the overall change. I think this was not the right kind of setup to use. Way too busy and way too much wasted space. The Yuku boards are pretty excellent in their setup and I would have preferred something more like that. It seems like all the strong points of the old board design were wiped away for a lesser product.
Agree with bac. No option to increase the number of threads on the page. Thread titles are too spread out.
:);):(:confused::mad::cool::p:D:eek::oops::rolleyes:o_O
I count 12.
I want:
:nocheer::punch::flip::argh::facepalm::pissed::ss::bully::moon::backlol::cwl::taffer::evil::yay::ban:
Well, that worked splendidly . . . . .
I count 12.
I want:
:nocheer::punch::flip::argh::facepalm::pissed::ss::bully::moon::backlol::cwl::taffer::evil::yay::ban:
Well, that worked splendidly . . . . .
Also,no drop down menu for going to different forums within this site. You have to go to top heading, look for forums, then click on that,for the forum your looking to switch to. One extra step.
There is actually, it was discussed in one of these threads. It's near the top on the right just under the read banner. It's an icon that looks like a mini org chart with one box on top and 3 boxes below. Click that and the list of forums comes up just like when you clicked on the drop down menu before, so you can switch between forums without going to the page where all the forums are listed.
I thought that too at first but it actually does work but it seems the posts that migrated from the old board aren't included in the search. If you search for something that was posted since yesterday morning it does work.
Similar threads
