While discussion concerning board software is what’s going on, slapping other posters around should not be part of that discussion. Cool your jets; dial down the invective.
Got an off-board problem with BigT? Don’t bring it here. Likewise dial it down.
Please confine yourselves to discussion of the matter at hand in this thread and don’t bring personalities into it.
I will certainly take any off-board problems with BigT elsewhere, but please see post 102, in this thread, where BigT says that he’s e-mailing him to “get him to come back”.
I have no knowledge of any of BigT’s offboard activities beyond what he’s bragging about here. I’m only commenting on that very creepy admission.
Will do.
I think it’s awesome that codinghorror has taken on this project. I disagree with most of what he says, but I appreciate him keeping us informed of his thoughts. Props and kudos.
Details:
I know that the board doesn’t make the software, but methinks this is a good thread anyway. It is topical: it is valid to comment about this message board, even if management lacks the resources to do anything about it by 2 orders of magnitude. Besides, I find this interface issue damn interesting.
Here’s a question. What might be the best examples for codinghorror (or somebody doing a similar project) to assess? The SDMB, Slashdot and his favored stackoverflow come to mind. Also wikipedia. Part of the core purpose of Something Awful is snark, so that’s less applicable. Yahoo answers is a terrific example of nonsuccess. The Ubuntu forums might be of interest.
SomethingAwful might not be the height of civility, but the quality of the discussion there is very high as long as you stick to certain subforums. It’s certainly an interesting example.
I think you have a great idea - address forum software to make it work better. There may be arguments over what better means, but at least you raise the question for discussion.
Well, you are correct that in a bookstore you see there are lots of books, and you may even trip over a few just getting into the store. You are also correct that the category signs tend to be informative without being obtrusive. It’s not like each book section is in a separate room, with a door, so all you see from the front is a series of doors with category names on them. You can see there are a lot of books, maybe get a feel for how big each section is, though you can’t really see the specifics of any book until you get close to the category and look at the shelves.
I don’t think the card catalog analogy is valid, but there is something of a point in the difference in experience. People have different ways of thinking, and there are different ways to access the content. Some people like the “What’s current” feature that shows threads with recent activity.
My approach takes several steps. First I go to the SD home page (the site with the columns) and read the article, then any threadspotting. Then I go to the forum list, jump to ATMB. Once done there, go back to the forum list and move to Comments. After that I hit the Control Panel and check my subscribed threads to see what has had comments. If I have time after that, I’ll jump to another forum and poke around. I key off the SDMB forum list.
I also consider that when a new user comes to a site, unless they are following a link/search result to a specific thread for a comment, it is helpful to come to the forum list to see the types of conversation. I think the SD does a decent job of trying to summarize the expected topics rather than just relying on the Forum Titles. No summary is going to be 100% effective, because it’s a summary, but SD at least attempts to expand on what the title means. Sure, seeing examples of threads is okay, but it’s a trade off. Does it make more sense to show a handful of thread titles with thread excerpts under each title category, and stretch the main page several downscrolls? Or does it make more sense to keep the title page short, so the user can see most of the categories in one view, see how many there are, get a feel for the variety of topics in discussion? Maybe that should be a configurable option.
Take a chill pill. Codinghorror does use the SDMB as an example of forum software problems, and perhaps to some extent his complaints miss the mark - some of our lack of features is intentional. But he does stress it’s an example of forum software limits, not content stupidity, and he does repeatedly say the content here is great.
This whole thread started as a conversation to find out what we, as forum users, would like to see in forum operability. It got moved to ATMB, I think erroneously, because the intent of the topic was not “Let’s fix the Straight Dope”, but “how can we make forum software work better?” While he posted essentially the same OP to several different boards, he has engaged in actual conversation in the thread. It wasn’t really spam, he certainly wasn’t selling anything, and while the OP was the same, the conversation has flowed organically at this site. There’s nothing wrong with how he posted to begin the conversation.
As for flaming us, sure, he’s picking on the layout and features a bit, but he has valid points, and the SDMB does make a good example for many of his points.
My big argument is that he complains about there hasn’t been any change in appearance in 13 years, but that is by conscious decision. Sure, we don’t have a lot of fancy bells and whistles like images and postranking and whatnot, but those are not limitations of the software, they are choices by the implementation. There are legitimate gripes about how vBulletin works: the edit window, coding, even in wysiwyg it isn’t really full display, multiquoting, etc. Those are worth exploring.
Not really. There are elements of Facebook that get referenced, but he states he wants something besides Facebook, that it doesn’t achieve the nature of conversations the way forums do.
How about this for a suggestion? There seems to be disagreement on the value of things like upvoting, adding likes, etc, just like there is disagreement on the value of avatars and signatures. How about making those features configurable by the user? In other words, if I want to see the “likes” added to the post, I can set them to display, or I can set them to be hidden. Configurable from the user’s position, like signatures currently are.
Oops, our bad! Looks like we’re gonna use your software after all! ^_^;
(For those that don’t know, Coding Horror is the one who made Discourse, the board software we’re switching to. Here’s his blog announcing the initial release, he even uses the SDMB in its vBulletin form as his example of outdated software. I find this extremely funny.)
I see he didn’t put a space in his username. That is eerily prescient! 
I was wondering why this long-dormant thread was revived. I figured it was a spammer, but you had a really good reason for doing so. Perhaps Coding Horror will participate in the SDMB, or at least assist in the background.
This is so funny. I remember this thread from back in 2012. Just last week I was pitching Discourse to my workplace as a better forum. I guess codinghorror gets the final laugh 
Against.
No they didn’t. No new information was given. Yes, Discourse was created by this guy. No, he doesn’t deserve an apology for spamming our board, lying about wanting our suggestions, while then telling us they were all wrong, and then later spamming the board again to tell us he used us in their advertising to mock us.
Discourse still continues to have problems. It is like-based, and gives people privileges for how many posts they like, and allows people who report posts to cause them to disappear. These are all features that other forum software does not have, and those others could have been chosen. Yes–even ones who would host the site for us.
Jragon’s post might make sense if we had “seen the light” and thought all these things he was promoting were good. But we didn’t. What happened was that the people with money made a decision without telling us, after we had explained why Discourse would not be a good fit. And the only real argument for Discourse is “well, it’s better than the board dying because we refuse to upgrade to the latest software version.” It’s a false dichotomy that these were the only two choices.
Still no one is saying that Discourse is a good fit for us. At best, we’re being told they did their best to nuke the bad aspects.
It’s just the typical “people who don’t post here make the importation decisions” issue we had with Ed.
… it was a joke.
I’m not fond of Discourse either but come on you have to admit the fact that this all originally grew out of this guy awkwardly posting in the forum telling us the software sucks and getting shouted down is kind of funny.
I’m just happy that everything worked out! 
Whether you win every battle you enter isn’t important (or even possible), what matters is that we continue to improve our little corners of the world as much as we can. I am as shocked and surprised as anyone else that Straight Dope eventually made the transition to Discourse 
. I realize Discourse is a big change but my dream is that, being fully and uncompromisingly open source software, not under the thumb of any megacorporation, Discourse can enable this community to survive and thrive for decades to come.
And to be fair Discourse has come a long, long way from when we started in 2013. We continue to evolve, improve, and refine Discourse as we go, and your feedback is essential. Because people having fun, interesting conversations – and maybe learning a thing or two along the way about each other – is the whole point of this exercise. 
Well played, sir!
By an odd coincidence, I started writing some forum software right about the time you started Discourse. I too used SDMB as an example of great community, crappy software in my pitch to my boss.
I really like Discourse. I think you’ve done a great job. Well done.
Thanks! Opinions vary, of course, as they do. And we still have miles to go before we sleep, and miles to go before we sleep.
Wow, rereading this thread, the reactions from some of the dopers were insanely rude. Good job on Discourse, @codinghorror. I’ve been pretty happy with it.
Nitpick: still hate infinite scroll because on mobile I get occasional random page reloads (like when you switch to a different app) and you find yourself doing the scrollloadscrollloadscrollloadwherewasiagain dance from the top of the page over and over and over.
Can you describe the exact steps to reproduce? Is this on a recent device with the latest native web browser (Chrome on Android, Safari on iOS)?
Yeah fully up to date iOS. Example: go to profile → activity and scroll down so it has to dynamically load a few times, so you’re a few “pages” back in history. Click a thread. Read it. Click “back”. You are back at the top. Infuriating when you are looking for something in particular. This also happens when I do no navigation if I switch to another app and safari decides to throw away its webview and reload it when I come back. All in all, you lose the nice property of a “proper” web site that the thing you are looking at has a url and if you navigate to that url you are looking at substantially the same thing again.
I should add that I think discourse does a phenomenal job of infinite scroll when compared to most sites. I just think it’s impossible to get perfect and the imperfections completely blow it for me, so I would never ever inflict it on my users for this sort of site.
Oh yes, we don’t implement it there. We could, but it’s sort of off the beaten path in terms of destinations in the UI.
Terminating the browser is all about the URL in the address bar; that’s what will get restored. This should not be a problem if you are reading a topic as the URL changes while you scroll. We figure most of the time you will be reading a topic, so a lot of effort goes into the topic view. It might happen in the topic list, because we don’t change the URL there.