# VERY Happy About "Gaming Action" Forum UNConsolidation



## garyh (Dec 13, 2003)

Just wanted to drop by and say that I'm not real pleased with the Talking the Talk getting scrunched off the main board.  It's really the more appropriate forum for a new PbP gamer to enter, rather than the games-a-flyin' Playing the Game forum.

Heck, Creamsteak and I were hoping to get Living Enworld on the main forum menu with subforums of its own (OOC and IC forums).  Now, even the classic Talking the Talk forum is a sub-forum doesn't get its own listing.

This change wasn't mentioned in the forum shakeup warning that was posted, or I would have raised these concerns earlier.  I don't think these changes are good for the PbP gaming here on the boards, and I'd like the forums back the way they were.  Also, the blurb for Talking the Talk doesn't even mention that that's the forum where PbP game recruitment takes place.

An explanation as to why this was done would be appreciated, at the very least.

Thanks.


----------



## Mirth (Dec 13, 2003)

garyh said:
			
		

> Just wanted to drop by and say that I'm not real pleased with the Talking the Talk getting scrunched off the main board.  It's really the more appropriate forum for a new PbP gamer to enter, rather than the games-a-flyin' Playing the Game forum.
> 
> Heck, Creamsteak and I were hoping to get Living Enworld on the main forum menu with subforums of its own (OOC and IC forums).  Now, even the classic Talking the Talk forum is a sub-forum doesn't get its own listing.
> 
> ...




What he said. I too feel that Talking the Talk is the intro point for new PbP gamers and to bury it in a sub-forum will make all the more difficult for those would-be gamers to find. 

Jay


----------



## jezter6 (Dec 13, 2003)

I am also extremely bummed that d20 modern got the shaft and went into OGL.

OGL?? what the heck? Now we get to watch threads disappear between spycraft fanboy threads and arguments about elf pr0n.

[sarcasm]GRRRRRRRRRRRREAT![/sarcasm]


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 13, 2003)

jezter6 said:
			
		

> I am also extremely bummed that d20 modern got the shaft and went into OGL.




More than anything else, I'm pleased about this change. Many of the topics discussed in both forums complement one another, and neither has a particularly rapid turnover. My expectation is that combining the forums will result in better conversation for everyone. Better one healthy forums than two quieter ones.

Try to keep an open mind, and see how it goes.


----------



## Mirth (Dec 13, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> More than anything else, I'm pleased about this change. Many of the topics discussed in both forums complement one another, and neither has a particularly rapid turnover. My expectation is that combining the forums will result in better conversation for everyone. Better one healthy forums than two quieter ones.
> 
> Try to keep an open mind, and see how it goes.




Hey Kevin, any feedback from you on the PbP forum changes?

Jay


----------



## Shalimar (Dec 13, 2003)

Speaking as a Play by Post Gamer, I have to agree with GaryH hole-heartedly, the consolidation of Talking the Talk with the regular In Character forum makes it much more difficult for new people to get involved in gaming on this website.


----------



## garyh (Dec 14, 2003)

Mirth said:
			
		

> Hey Kevin, any feedback from you on the PbP forum changes?
> 
> Jay




What Jay said. 

Any response to my original comments, P-Kitty?


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 14, 2003)

Sure. Let's try it for a week or so and make sure it's a problem.  Although I don't wish to speak for him and it would require some juggling, I'm guessing that in a worst case scenario Morrus can make the Talking the Talk forum into the entry point instead. Would that work?


----------



## Shalimar (Dec 14, 2003)

Why does one have to be the entry point for the other?  It worked fine the way it was.  Making either the entry point for the other is rather counter-intuitive.


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 14, 2003)

Doesn't bother me. Gary asked me to post, and... well... this is one of the VERY FEW times that I don't see the difference in a tiny thing.


----------



## garyh (Dec 14, 2003)

I agree with Shalimar. There wasn't a need to condense them in the first place.  Further, we won't really have any proof of a "problem," as you put it, because the long-term concern is new people won't be able to find the PbP gaming.  What, are we going to survey members, asking if they knew we had gaming on the boards, to determine if it's serious?

Not trying to be snarky, but it's hard to prove a negative.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 14, 2003)

garyh said:
			
		

> I agree with Shalimar. There wasn't a need to condense them in the first place.  Further, we won't really have any proof of a "problem," as you put it, because the long-term concern is new people won't be able to find the PbP gaming.  What, are we going to survey members, asking if they knew we had gaming on the boards, to determine if it's serious?



Ditto...    This seems so much like a change for change shake.   

Now the "closing" of the d20 Modern forum was a good move, I could and did go in there at least weekly and I saw the same threads...   

Now, to be honest, I see the same threads in OOC and IG threads but at least that's because theirs movement.


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 15, 2003)

Here's my opinion:

While it's no skin off my teeth (I know where it is, and what it's for), I don't see how it's a good OR NEEDED arrangement.

Do the Mods realize that Talking the Talk is the 3rd-most-popular Forum on your Boards? (tied with House Rules)

I don't see how you feel so little concern over moving such a large traffic-base as that, _without consulting the members._


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 15, 2003)

reapersaurus said:
			
		

> Do the Mods realize that Talking the Talk is the 3rd-most-popular Forum on your Boards? (tied with House Rules)



Technically *Playing the Game* is the third most popular forum making it one of the big three; with 172,031 posts there is a huge drop off to fourth.

Fourth: House rules
Fifth: Talking the Talk

Now the fallowing all have "front page" status but have less posts that talking the talk:
Story Hour 
d20 Modern, d20 System & OGL Games 
Rogues Gallery 
d20 & Open Gaming Publishers 
Gamers Seeking Gamers 
Art Gallery, Cartography & Miniatures Painting 
Fantasy & Sci-Fi Books, Movies & TV 
Software, Computers and D&D Utilities
Miniatures Trading and RPG Marketplace 
The Hive: Nemry struts his stuff 
Meta 

Obvious, The Hive is new, the Marketplace needs front-page status or it’s going to be allot less successful than it is now...  Meta would obviously need to stay also.

I've already complained so I'll offer a suggestion:

What if you hide all of the "private" forums below Meta, they really don't apply to most of the users and the user that do need into it WILL no how to get into it.  



			
				reapersaurus said:
			
		

> I don't see how you feel so little concern over moving such a large traffic-base as that, _without consulting the members._




Yeah that's pretty much what shocked me the most also...


----------



## GnomeWorks (Dec 16, 2003)

I think I'll throw in with most of the others that've posted here, and say that I dislike the change.  _Talking the Talk_ and _Playing the Game_, at least, should remain seperate forums, IMHO.


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 16, 2003)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Technically *Playing the Game* is the third most popular forum making it one of the big three; with 172,031 posts there is a huge drop off to fourth.
> 
> Fourth: House rules
> Fifth: Talking the Talk



Good summary, and I agree with the suggestions.

Technically, though, I'm pretty certain that Playing the Game's 172K postcount is INCLUDING Talking the Talk and Fight Club and Living ENWOrld (since I've tried to monitor the traffic since they were created, and PtG and TtT were almost always close to equal in postcount).

I don't know what the current postcount in PtG is, but assuming it's the same as TtT, than they are both (effectively) tied with House Rules for 3rd most popular Forums on the entire boards.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 16, 2003)

reapersaurus said:
			
		

> Good summary, and I agree with the suggestions.



Thanks! 



			
				reapersaurus said:
			
		

> Technically, though, I'm pretty certain that Playing the Game's 172K postcount is INCLUDING Talking the Talk and Fight Club and Living ENWOrld



I'm pretty sure I'm right, I got my numbers from the fallowing link:

Gaming Action Sub-Forums 

Though for the record I didn't count the posts individually.


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 16, 2003)

wow - that;s VERY intriguing, Brother Shatterstone.
I don't see how those numbers are possible.
I've not looked at the numbers for awhile, but never did PtG have THAT much more than TtT.

I really do think that those numbers for PtG are including the sub-forums.
The number that really makes me believe that is the number of threads in PtG.
I don't see how PtG can have 3.5 times more threads than TtT, since there is usually at least a 1:1 ratio between the two forums.

Do you get what I mean?
Very seldom are there more than 1 thread in PtG created for each thread in TtT. In fact, the only times there would be more threads in PtG is when long-running adventures are continued (and I don't think that's happened more than a hundred-threads' worth). However, in TtT there's more chance of a new thread being created that is independant of a game running in PtG. There are many threads created there solely for discussing PbP in general, or informing people that they'll be gone, or are back, or are Recruitment threads that don't actually get a game started.

Is there any way for a Mod to confirm how many posts/threads are ACTUALLY in PtG?
Does that 172K+ number include the other forums?


----------



## Dinkeldog (Dec 17, 2003)

Not that I claim to be Morrus' mouthpiece or anything, but part of the idea is to try to keep the distance between the top of the boards and the bottom from being quite so huge.  Since Playing the Game and Talking the Talk are related, it makes more sense to put them together.

Now from a strictly outsider viewpoint, I like having the PtG forum on the outside because that's where I'm more likely to go and poke around and read other peoples' games like it's a story hour.  YMMV.

The other forums that may not get as much traffic as the PbP forums are still distinct enough that we feel merging them would be a bad idea.  Board re-organization is, however a constant process.  As new ideas and changing board patterns emerge (note that d20 systems and d20 Modern are now merged), things will shift a bit here and there.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 17, 2003)

reapersaurus said:
			
		

> wow - that;s VERY intriguing, Brother Shatterstone.
> I don't see how those numbers are possible.
> I've not looked at the numbers for awhile, but never did PtG have THAT much more than TtT.



:shrugs:

I doubt the number lie...  

But try this: 
Your "front page" 

And compare to this: 
RPG Forums Sub-Forums 

They’re the same to me...  Though one are two post diffrences could happen if someone posts while you in the process of testing.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 17, 2003)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> Since Playing the Game and Talking the Talk are related, it makes more sense to put them together.



Seems to me there was better choices to merge, and or remove from the front page.


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 18, 2003)

Brother Shatterstone is right.

Mods, there are better ways to save Front Page space, and they make more sense:

a) move the 3 useless-to-almost-all Private Forums into a Private Sub-Forum.

b) Move the 13th Kingdoms Forum into the "Hosted D&D Settings and d20 Games". 
What the heck is it doing on the front page anyway? Who's is it? There's less than 300 posts there, unless they're invisible. They have 18 Sub Forums in there! And only 5 are used (I use that term loosely).
Was it a pet project that hasn't taken off?

These 2 changes make more sense, and they affect next-to-nobody (AFAIK).
This would save 3 'spots' on the Front Page, allowing TtT and Fight Club to come back to the Front Page where they belong.

Thank you for considering this suggestion on behalf of the hundreds of long-standing members affected.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Dec 18, 2003)

Actually, 13 Kingdoms would be more likely merged into the PbP forums.    To find out what it is, hunt down Emiricol and check his .sig.


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 18, 2003)

Personally I always wondered why 13 Kingdoms isn't in the Gaming forums. It would attract the appropriate people there, at least. Though it would be competing with my pet project .


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 21, 2003)

So I take it the official response to our valid issue with the move is "Screw You?"   :thumbsdown:


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 22, 2003)

reapersaurus said:
			
		

> So I take it the official response to our valid issue with the move is "Screw You?"   :thumbsdown:




Have you heard anyone say screw you? Lordy, Reapersaurus, maybe you could be more rude if you tried - but I doubt it.

Morrus is aware of the request. I have no idea how big a deal it is, and I'm sure if he decides to switch it around he'll let everyone know. We certainly appreciate the feedback about what people like and dislike - it's tremendously useful.


----------



## Mirth (Dec 22, 2003)

reapersaurus said:
			
		

> So I take it the official response to our valid issue with the move is "Screw You?"   :thumbsdown:




Jeez, ease up on the caffeine, will ya reap?

I, for one, will trust the powers that be to make the right decision...


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 23, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Sure. Let's try it for a week or so and make sure it's a problem.



umm, yeah, Piratecat, I did hear the mods _effectively_ say screw you to all the PbP gamers. 
They said it with their silence and inaction.

It takes but a click of the mouse to get the Forums re-arranged, and there are still 3 Private Forums on the front page and 1 inappropriate forum (13th Kingdom).

We have done (as members) all we should have to to get the matter changed. We staed our objections, and demonstrated why some of the most popular forums on this board shouldn't have been changed, and provided alternate (superior) fixes to accomplish the assumed objective. 
You yourself said to give it a week. It's been well over a week. It's not like this place is the Senate, that needs hearings and months to get things done.

I certainly could have sugar-coated my desire for attention to this matter, but I want the mods to understand what their continued inaction (to hundreds of affected members) could be perceived as. This change was not welcome, not needed, or even warned about nor voted on. But most importantly, it's not effective - there are clearer targets for consolodation on the front page.


----------



## Darkness (Dec 23, 2003)

Oh no, the mods are at it again! What will we do? 

reapersaurus, sorry but this being an admin-level action, the _mods_ can't do anything.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 23, 2003)

Neither can the style monkeys.


----------



## Grazzt (Dec 23, 2003)

My question would simply be:

If it's such a problem and such a big deal about the forum, why have only 29 people replied to this thread? 

Now, if ENWorld had say 30-40, maybe 50 members only, and 29 replied to this thread (and most were against the forum move), ya might have something.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 23, 2003)

Reaper doesn't speak for the silent non-existant majority???  Say it ain't so!


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 23, 2003)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> My question would simply be:
> 
> If it's such a problem and such a big deal about the forum, why have only 29 people replied to this thread?




Actually, 13 people have replied - of whom six have been against the change. That's not exactly a clear mandate that the forum members have somehow been "screwed," despite the fact that the people who have posted in this thread clearly feel strongly about it. I strongly suspect that to most people it's merely one extra click. I'm certainly sure that it isn't the death knell of the forums, but I'm sensitive to the moderator's concern that it may discourage new players (although I don't see this myself.) 

We hear your objections nevertheless, and I'm not sure we've reached any final conclusions yet.


----------



## Seonaid (Dec 23, 2003)

My two cents, if this is still in debate:

I'm confused by two things. First has been said already, and that is--why are the restricted forums on the front page? I never understood that. It seems kind of elitist and "nyah nyah nyah" to me.

Second, though, is this: why the concern with space at all? I'm on a dinky dial-up and the page doesn't take that long to load, and I don't have any problems with finding what I need.

If the concern is drawing new people and making sure they understand what's going on, I think one of the big changes that needs to be made is getting rid of the restricted forums (putting them as sub-forums, as has been noted previously). Also, it seems to me that there's a lot of "wasted" space at the top of the front page and the bottom of the front page. The bottom in particular could be crunched a little, keeping the same information but with less "white" space (even though it's not white ). And what's the deal with the five lines of text at the top? Is that necessary? I have to say that, the first time I logged in as a Community Supporter, it surprised me to see the "Community Supporter" link at the top of the page. Maybe it's a script thing (I'm not familiar with anything beyond basic HTML), but it made me feel kind of unwelcome.  Is there some way to have certain things shown only to Community Supporters (or to non-Supporters)? I haven't been on the front page without logging in for a while, so maybe it's completely different, and maybe it has to do with the board format I'm using, but I would think that the same basic thing should be available to everyone.

One last thing--why is the "Who's Online" link not available on the front page? Am I missing it? I always access it through the drop-down menus at the bottom of pages, but that means I have to actually open a thread first. Yeah, big deal, right? I guess not, but it's a little thing I miss from before the restructuring.

I dunno, this is kind of spastic, but those are my thoughts. I'm feeling a bit incoherent, so excuse anything that doesn't make sense, and if it's all explained away easily, great. Like someone (Mirth?) said, I'm sure the right decisions will be made, and perhaps the current ones were made using information I'm not privy to, or scripting woes I wouldn't know about, but I figured I'd drop a line anyway.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 23, 2003)

Obviously for Reaper the admins not doing immediately doing what he requested is the same as being screwed.

I wish I got laid as often.


----------



## Seonaid (Dec 23, 2003)

Okay, so I just logged out and went to the new front page, and it's pretty much exactly like my front page . . . except for the two strips of links at the top of the page . . . what are *those* for? Eh, no offense to whoever designed them, and this really has no bearing on my previous post, but man that's ugly, in an unwieldy sense. And the gray box of linkage (the five lines of text I was complaining about previously, in a different format), IMO, draw the eyes to something that's perhaps not quite as important as "Register" or "Become a CS." Again, my two cents, and again, sorry for spastic knee-jerk reactions. They aren't meant to be.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 23, 2003)

Seonaid said:
			
		

> And what's the deal with the five lines of text at the top? Is that necessary? I have to say that, the first time I logged in as a Community Supporter, it surprised me to see the "Community Supporter" link at the top of the page. Maybe it's a script thing (I'm not familiar with anything beyond basic HTML), but it made me feel kind of unwelcome.  Is there some way to have certain things shown only to Community Supporters (or to non-Supporters)?




Yes and no.

Yes, it can be done (I think)

No, I don't know how to do it.  What I do know how to do is to hide User CP if someone isn't registered and hide registration if the mods turn it off.  I can look into it, but it's a pretty big hassle.



> I haven't been on the front page without logging in for a while, so maybe it's completely different, and maybe it has to do with the board format I'm using, but I would think that the same basic thing should be available to everyone.
> 
> One last thing--why is the "Who's Online" link not available on the front page?




Cause I forgot it and no one has pointed it out until now.  I can put it in with Russ' ok.


----------



## Seonaid (Dec 23, 2003)

Michael Morris said:
			
		

> Cause I forgot it and no one has pointed it out until now.  I can put it in with Russ' ok.



Great! Thanks a lot!


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 23, 2003)

The who's online link is currently available through the jump-to menu at the bottom right; scroll up to the top. Michael, if you want to add a link in (between faq and search?) that'd be great, and I'll take responsibility for giving you the okay. Thank you.

Seonaid, you bring up some great points. In particular, it's worth mentioning that keeping the front page more compressed has a lot less to do with bandwidth than it does with trying not to overwhelm new visitors. In the same way that GaryH doesn't want us to inadvertently discourage new pbp players, we don't want to discourage new members either. Seeing a bajillion forums can be pretty intimidating.

As for the 13 kingdoms forums, Morrus has specific agreements with people who have private forums.  Such an agreement may specify the forum's placement.


----------



## Seonaid (Dec 23, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> The who's online link is currently available through the jump-to menu at the bottom right; scroll up to the top.



Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. I don't have the jump-to menu on my front page. I have to go into a thread in order to find it. Maybe that's the setting of the format I picked? It's a tiny thing (especially now that I say it "out loud," as it were), but it was so nice when it was on the front page.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 23, 2003)

Seonaid said:
			
		

> Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. I don't have the jump-to menu on my front page. I have to go into a thread in order to find it. Maybe that's the setting of the format I picked? It's a tiny thing (especially now that I say it "out loud," as it were), but it was so nice when it was on the front page.




It is on the front page of the forum default, but it's near to the bottom.  This is an artifact of how VBulletin assembles the pages.

Please bear in mind that while VBulletin allows us a LOT of control on how the pages arrive to you, there are some things that would be difficult to change or implement without causing problems.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 23, 2003)

Michael Morris said:
			
		

> It is on the front page of the forum default, but it's near to the bottom.




It is? Michael, where? Maybe I'm just missing it.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 23, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> It is? Michael, where? Maybe I'm just missing it.




My bad.  It's not visible on the very top level... :sigh:


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 23, 2003)

Heh, it is now; thanks for putting in that link.

Now, hijack over and back to the matter at hand.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 23, 2003)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> If it's such a problem and such a big deal about the forum, why have only 29 people replied to this thread?




Well, as has be stated before not everyone on the forum reads meta...  I'm sure the people only here for pbp probably do it even less.   If you want me too I can see if I can round up a few more protestors.

In the defense of Reaper, I was going to ask the same thing, but lot more pleasantness.


----------



## Seonaid (Dec 23, 2003)

I found it! But I had to switch style sets to get it.  Thanks anyway though. If you get around to it, is it possible to stick it in the other sets? I prefer Classic, myself.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 23, 2003)

Seonaid said:
			
		

> I found it! But I had to switch style sets to get it.  Thanks anyway though. If you get around to it, is it possible to stick it in the other sets? I prefer Classic, myself.



Yeah go and try reading the "House" while in PHB.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 23, 2003)

Seonaid said:
			
		

> I found it! But I had to switch style sets to get it.  Thanks anyway though. If you get around to it, is it possible to stick it in the other sets? I prefer Classic, myself.




I can stick it in the others, let me poke around and make sure it's in all the headers...


----------



## garyh (Dec 24, 2003)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Well, as has be stated before not everyone on the forum reads meta...  I'm sure the people only here for pbp probably do it even less.   If you want me too I can see if I can round up a few more protestors.
> 
> In the defense of Reaper, I was going to ask the same thing, but lot more pleasantness.




BroS said what I was going to.  I doubt many PbP'ers know about this thread.  I wanted to discuss it here first before getting a "torches and pitchforks" crowd together in PbP-land.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Dec 24, 2003)

garyh said:
			
		

> BroS said what I was going to.  I doubt many PbP'ers know about this thread.  I wanted to discuss it here first before getting a "torches and pitchforks" crowd together in PbP-land.



I do not think that what to discuss it, they just want to see a volume of complaints... Or at least that's what I got from Grazzt comments. 

So lets start a thread in Talking the Talk, and I’ll be more than willing to edit my signature to include a link to here…  That’s 1885 notices for everyone to see and read…


----------



## Seonaid (Dec 24, 2003)

[hijack]Thanks a lot for being so accomodating about the "Who's Online" bit. I appreciate it![/hijack]


----------



## reapersaurus (Dec 24, 2003)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> If it's such a problem and such a big deal about the forum, why have only 29 people replied to this thread?
> 
> Now, if ENWorld had say 30-40, maybe 50 members only, and 29 replied to this thread (and most were against the forum move), ya might have something.



Don't you think that this approach is a bit unrealistic?

So 7,222 members have to post to this thread (just over half of 14,442) to get the Admins to fix a mistake?
I would think it was common sense not to have as popular of Forum as Talking the Talk omitted from the front page.

Just because most have not gone out of their way to mention/complain/constructively criticise in this thread, it shouldn't be assumed that they like the change.
I realistically would estimate that over half don't like HAVING to make that one extra click off the front page. Who likes making an un-needed click? It's not The End of the Boards, but it is an obvious inconvenience.

Again, until the Private Forums are consolidated on the front page, there's no business inconveniencing so many people.

I trust that the Admins (thx for the clarification, Darkness) don't need a mob assembled to see a (superficially) simple situation.


----------



## jdavis (Dec 24, 2003)

well if we all have to chime in on this one  then I'd point out I didn't realize it was that popular (or even existed for that matter......) What is it and why should I care that it takes a extra click to get there? I can understand why people may want to talk about this but why would anybody loose sleep over it? They have been talking about moving things around for a while now, this wasn't all that big a shock, and it's not anything to get huffy about.


----------



## Grazzt (Dec 24, 2003)

reapersaurus said:
			
		

> Don't you think that this approach is a bit unrealistic?
> 
> So 7,222 members have to post to this thread (just over half of 14,442) to get the Admins to fix a mistake?
> I would think it was common sense not to have as popular of Forum as Talking the Talk omitted from the front page.




Nope- 7,000+ members don't have to respond and post that they don't like it...but more than a handful would be nice (at least in my opinion).



> Just because most have not gone out of their way to mention/complain/constructively criticise in this thread, it shouldn't be assumed that they like the change.




And it shouldn't be assumed that they don't like the change either for the very same reason(s).



> I realistically would estimate that over half don't like HAVING to make that one extra click off the front page. Who likes making an un-needed click? It's not The End of the Boards, but it is an obvious inconvenience.




Well, as PC said earlier, its being discussed, but I think you are exaggerating the numbers a bit. Over half? Evidence to support this? And as for "un-needed" clicks, its not un-needed if that is the area you want to visit. Inconvience to who? No way this board or ANY BOARD will ever be able to satisfy 100% of the visitors/members/whatever. People are always gonna complain/be unhappy/consider something an inconvience.



> Again, until the Private Forums are consolidated on the front page, there's no business inconveniencing so many people.




Again...Inconvience to who? No way this board or ANY BOARD will ever be able to satisfy 100% of the visitors/members/whatever. People are always gonna complain/be unhappy/consider something an inconvience.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 24, 2003)

Well, nothing is going to be decided one way or another until people are back from traveling. Happy holidays, all!


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Dec 24, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Well, nothing is going to be decided one way or another until people are back from traveling. Happy holidays, all!




Indeed not, but I figure I'll chime in since I'm at work on Christmas Eve and have nothing better to do. 

I see several sides to this argument.  While the change in question has not specifically inconvenienced me--I often navigate through the drop-down at the bottom of pages anyway--I see the complainants' point:  _new_ users of the PbP forums here are most likely going to use Talking the Talk as an entry point (I did when I started into PbP).  Moving the Talking the Talk forum inside Playing the Game makes it more difficult for new PbP'ers to figure out how to get into a game.

If the actual reason for the forum in-folding has been to conserve space on the front page--and, like Seonaid, I see little to no reason to do this as there are very few graphics and the page loads nigh-instantaneously when the server's not clogged--then the private forums should definitely be removed from the front page or regrouped.  Isn't there some way to display them only to those who can read them?  I know phpBB does that.

If the worry is not total loading time and total space on the front page, but total amount "above the fold" as it were... well, assuming the average user is running at 1024x768, above the fold includes only the first six forums on the page.  (For users at 800x600--and they do exist, I'm certain--only the first two or three forums are above the fold.)  No amount of forum in-folding will change that, and I suspect those top six forums can't be further collapsed--probably a good thing.

To *reapersaurus*' comment:  I'm certain the admins don't wait for 7000 people to respond, no.  In fact, of the 14,000 members, I'd lay even money that half or more have 0 or 1 posts, and that half of the rest have not posted in six months.  On a messageboard this big, people come and go, or come, register, and then leave without posting, and the actual community size--that is, people who are actively part of the community--should not be considered to be more than about a third of the total "registered users."  And that's generous.

And now I've rambled on for quite a while.   Happy holidays, y'all!


----------



## Morrus (Dec 24, 2003)

Folks, it's Christmas!  Go and eat some turkey, drink some wine, open some presents or whatever else it is you do at this time of year.  I'll look into this when I get home this weekend - right now I'm busy spending quality time with my family, and this is far from an emergency.

Have a great holiday, everyone!


----------



## garyh (Dec 30, 2003)

Thanks for at least poking into this thread, Morrus.  Happy Holidays, and I'm looking forward to hearing more on this issue from the higher-ups.


----------



## BSF (Dec 31, 2003)

I have been rather quiet in the Meta forum lately.  So, I will poke my nose in here now.  

Can we handle forum display with styles?  If so, then we could create a default style that was less overwhelming for new folks and a style with more forums displayed for those that prefer to sift through fewer sub-forums.  Admittedly, this might be a lot of work, but is it a possibility?


----------



## The Goblin King (Jan 5, 2004)

Humm...I have no need for torches thanks to Darkvision.  Pitchforks?  Oh, those pointy things humans use...no, don't have any of those.  However, I do have *an army of Goblins riding Worgs!* Your Giant Eagle friends can not save you now Morrus!!!!!11111

Okay, I understand we can't get top billing.  I can deal with that.  I know why TtT was tucked away.  It was because it doesn't have the highest activity, yes?  Really, does having one extra forum on the front page really make that big a difference?  If so, why is "Moderators Only", "Newshounds", and "Message Board Guild" on the front page?  Those are all private forums.

What I want to know is why does it say "Living EN World.  Lets see if this works out.  Gotta website?"  What does that mean?  Is it leftover code or something?


----------



## reapersaurus (Jan 8, 2004)

Admins - what are your thoughts on this problem?

It's after the holidays....


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 10, 2004)

Agreed, this is still a pain... We've kept quite and given you plenty of time and I'll we gotten is silence...  It's almost been a whole month since the first post.

Anyhow I'm going to be quite now...


----------



## Isida Kep'Tukari (Jan 10, 2004)

Well... the problem seems to be solved as the Talking the Talk forum is now visible again.  Horray!  Thanks Admins.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 10, 2004)

Isida Kep'Tukari said:
			
		

> Well... the problem seems to be solved as the Talking the Talk forum is now visible again.  Horray!  Thanks Admins.



Your right!  I just noticed!  Thanks Admins!


----------



## reapersaurus (Jan 11, 2004)

Thanks admins!

Much better.

I was hoping to find an explanatory post from someone representing the Admins on this thread - I was surprised just to see the problem fixed, but not mentioned here.

Oh, well - again, good job, and thanks for the fix.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 11, 2004)

Morrus took care of it earlier today. I've never moved a forum - it scares me.  

Glad you guys are happy. We've moved the Moderator's forum, but we'll probably just make it invisible. I'm looking into some of your other suggestions, too.


----------



## NarlethDrider (Jan 11, 2004)

Let me start by saying that I love these boards & spend more time here than anywhere else in internet land----usually, I'm one to keep my mouth shut & just roll w/the punches, but since it seems I'm not the only one, I'll add my tarnished 2 cent opinion---bring back the old gaming section! It was definately easier/better back then & as that online gaming is my only gaming outlet, the gaming section was(then) easiest to find what new games were starting.

Also, I'm not a big fan of "Plots" being moved into general---I can understand since it wasnt the quickest moving thread, but, unless you go through the first few pages of "General" theres a good chance u may miss something, & with my slow dial up connection, that kind of browsing isnt often possible for me due to time constraints----of course, being that I'm turning in to an old fogey in march (I'll be 37), I could be just set in my ways & resistant to change


----------



## dpdx (Jan 11, 2004)

Frankly, I spend about 90% of my time here reading and posting to my subs, and those have always worked. So it doesn't bother me how they're organized all that much.

But why does one forum have to be the lead-in to another? Seems to me that anyone who can roll up a character is smart enough to figure out where to start in PbP - have been playing a while, and haven't been intruded IC by people asking, "Can I play?" yet. 

This argument reminds me of the "homage" argument in Braveheart. "If yer want ta play, PbP, yer'll pay 'omage!" "I pay 'omage to Scotland! Er, the forums!"

Don't know why, really.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 11, 2004)

NarlethDrider said:
			
		

> Also, I'm not a big fan of "Plots" being moved into general.




As I probably mentioned up-thread, I'm incredibly pleased with how this is going. Most plot threads are receiving more than 2-3x the number of replies they previously got. In exchange, they slide out of easy view faster. I think the improvement in ideas and feedback is worth the tradeoff, especially because we'll end up going back to 40 threads per page when we upgrade our server.

Dpdx, we use sub-forums in order to keep the main entry forum listing relatively uncluttered. I've made all private forums invisible to non-members, which helps as well. Including everything, there are something like 70 forums; I don't think we want them all immediately visible.


----------



## NarlethDrider (Jan 11, 2004)

Say, exactly how long has the "Talking the talk" thread been back up on the main page? I just wondering exactly how long an _ass_umption has been clouding my vision


----------



## Mirth (Jan 12, 2004)

Thanks Russ & Kevin! I really do think it will function better this way


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 12, 2004)

Well, so did the moderators (Garyh and Creamsteak); we made an inadvertent mistake in not consulting with them before the first change, and it's something we apologize for. They do a hell of a job.


----------



## Creamsteak (Jan 12, 2004)

Liar. We just bother you till we get our way. That reminds me, I want that message changed that is the current description of Living EN World.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 12, 2004)

What do you want it to say? I told you three times, we're NOT changing it to say "Creamsteak is freakin' hot! Grab some, ladies." I don't care how many times you ask.


----------



## Darkness (Jan 12, 2004)

Creamsteak said:
			
		

> Liar. We just bother you till we get our way. That reminds me, I want that message changed that is the current description of Living EN World.



Ya know...


----------



## garyh (Jan 14, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Well, so did the moderators (Garyh and Creamsteak); we made an inadvertent mistake in not consulting with them before the first change, and it's something we apologize for. They do a hell of a job.




No hard feelings.  Glad everything's worked out in the end.

Say, do I get a pony, too?


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jan 14, 2004)

Well, I gave it some time but have to say I really miss the plots forum.


----------



## Chacal (Jan 15, 2004)

Hand of Evil said:
			
		

> Well, I gave it some time but have to say I really miss the plots forum.



I miss it too. 
But I can understand that the mod prefer running a message board rather than an archive.

Well, if we can wish for poneys,  why not about a new version of the boards that could handle link forums ( a kind of specific view), or could sort by message Icon, or use filters on message icons ?

I know, I know, christmas is over 

Chacal
P.S: how about updating the thread's title with more happyness ?


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 15, 2004)

garyh said:
			
		

> No hard feelings.  Glad everything's worked out in the end.
> 
> Say, do I get a pony, too?




Sure.


----------



## garyh (Jan 16, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Sure.




Yay!  A pony!



			
				Chacal said:
			
		

> P.S: how about updating the thread's title with more happyness ?




Good idea!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 16, 2004)

garyh said:
			
		

> Yay!  A pony!




Their will be no ponies for slackers! 



			
				garyh said:
			
		

> Good idea!




I know.  

[J/K] In all honesty how is the pasta paldain coming along?


----------

