User feedback and questions.

[Sheep]

Use this thread to ask questions, share comments, and of course provide suggestions for improving the Encyclopedia!

 

[Sydian]

So far, I think it's going rather well. At first, I wasn't too sure about this thing, but now that I'm seeing it in action, I think it's going smoothly. My only concern is that when this is mainstreamed into the rest of the forum for all members, people will be making threads and I'm afraid they'll get pushed down and some will get missed. :(

Also, will there be a requirement before making one? Something like "must be active for three months with 100 posts" or something, since new members should be using the Welcome Lounge. I don't want this to take away from that forum. So yeah, that's all I got for now. :)

 

[Honest]

I still think we should have a cap to the number of currently active threads. And then after ___ amount of time, all active threads would be locked and the next wave of threads could be made. Would give equal treatment to peoples' threads at the expense of a first come first serve system.

 

[Sydian]

I still think we should have a cap to the number of currently active threads. And then after ___ amount of time, all active threads would be locked and the next wave of threads could be made. Would give equal treatment to peoples' threads at the expense of a first come first serve system.

I don't really like that...but can't think of an alternative. Waaah!!

 

[Honest]

Same issue here Syd. =( I can't think of anything good either. The waitlist idea would give people a good idea as to when their thread would be approved though.

 

[droomph]

What about the stickied threads idea?

So basically take everything you said, but replace "lock" with "unsticky".

 

[Honest]

Oh, that could work! But it sounds like we might have a lot of stickied threads at once. If that doesn't matter, then I'd be all for it. Sounds like it could definitely work as an alternate.

 

[bobandbill]

I think there would be a need to have a limit to threads running at a time, too.

Not too sure how much 'better' or difference stickying to locking makes, sounds a bit messy to me.

 

[droomph]

Oh, that could work! But it sounds like we might have a lot of stickied threads at once. If that doesn't matter, then I'd be all for it. Sounds like it could definitely work as an alternate.

I think there would be a need to have a limit to threads running at a time, too.

Not too sure how much 'better' or difference stickying to locking makes, sounds a bit messy to me.

Orrrr maybe a prefix would work too. That way it's a lot easier to focus just on the up-and-coming threads rather than sort through them all, while fixing the too many stickies problem.

 

[Taemin]

My only concern is that when this is mainstreamed into the rest of the forum for all members, people will be making threads and I'm afraid they'll get pushed down and some will get missed. :(

P much that.

I was already noticing that some of the threads in there get less attention, and there's no way to avoid that really. I'll tend to feel bad for the people who's thread get overlooked, and I imagine that would be a letdown for the person who made it too. This is a good idea, however, and it's not like it can please every single member.

Liking the idea that Bloodex mentioned too.

Maybe older threads can be locked, or threads that have 2348092 replies can be closed to allow the newer ones to get more attention? That ties in with there being a time limit, in a way.

 

[droomph]

P much that.

I was already noticing that some of the threads in there get less attention, and there's no way to avoid that really. I'll tend to feel bad for the people who's thread get overlooked, and I imagine that would be a letdown for the person who made it too. This is a good idea, however, and it's not like it can please every single member.

Liking the idea that Bloodex mentioned too.

Maybe older threads can be locked, or threads that have 2348092 replies can be closed to allow the newer ones to get more attention? That ties in with there being a time limit, in a way.

I dunno but maybe bringing more attention rather than forcing more attention would work better.

 

[Taemin]

I dunno if it would really be forcing it, but aside from locking old threads, how else would newer intros get more attention? It's hard to tell people "You just have to make it more amusing". xD;

 

[droomph]

I dunno if it would really be forcing it, but aside from locking old threads, how else would newer intros get more attention? It's hard to tell people "You just have to make it more amusing". xD;

Well, if you sticky or prefix it, it'll be more noticed, and if people just don't want to ask you questions after all that, I guess try again?

Idk really. This isn't a job to ask questions, so might as well give more emphasis on new people, while at the same time letting the popular ones have their fun.

 

[bobandbill]

I don't think prefixes alone would necessarily do it. It won't incline everyone to stop paying attention to an other thread compared to it just being closed. I also don't see how closed threads wouldn't be easy to stop focusing on or whatnot to begin with...


I'm still for a waiting list being used, tbh. People sign up to make a thread in that, first x people have their period for their threads, and then it's the next set, etc etc.

 

[droomph]

I don't think prefixes alone would necessarily do it. It won't incline everyone to stop paying attention to an other thread compared to it just being closed. I also don't see how closed threads wouldn't be easy to stop focusing on or whatnot to begin with...


I'm still for a waiting list being used, tbh. People sign up to make a thread in that, first x people have their period for their threads, and then it's the next set, etc etc.

Well, I kinda was thinking just to make the opportunities even. It's technically discrimination if we force the popular ones down. But since I also like having many new guys being paid attention to, we should put just a lot more emphasis on them rather than outright only letting the new ones go around.

 

[Sydian]

Well, I kinda was thinking just to make the opportunities even. It's technically discrimination if we force the popular ones down. But since I also like having many new guys being paid attention to, we should put just a lot more emphasis on them rather than outright only letting the new ones go around.

Also want to add that new people will want to learn about others, and it would suck if that person's thread was already locked.

In regards to new users though, I think they should be using the Welcome Lounge and when they've reached a certain amount of activity (3 months? 5?) and number of posts (100?) then they can make on in MIC.

 

[Aquacorde]

I support having a post count/time active requirement. 100 posts seems a bit low to me though? I would say 300 posts/four months. At that point someone would probably have a good feel for the forum and be known by a decent amount of people, right?

 

[Her]

I'm still for a waiting list being used, tbh. People sign up to make a thread in that, first x people have their period for their threads, and then it's the next set, etc etc.

That sounds fine and all, but the problem I see with that is timezones. I mean, it's all fine and dandy for the Americans or Europeans, but for those in the Southern Hemisphere it's going to be hard to get a place if it's first come, first serve.

 

[Nick]

I'd rather let threads naturally run their course than cut their lives short to move others in for their place. That doesn't feel very organic, and that's what I really would like this forum to feel like. At the same time, we can't have hundreds of threads being posted if this becomes public.

I would rather not restrict thread making here to people, but I would be okay with restricting it to a requirement of being here for at least a month. At least by then a new member would have integrated into the community enough to not be considered a new slice of cheese, have had planted some roots in a forum, and have met and talked to a handful of people.

 

[Nick]

Donating doesn't make you any less new than not donating...