OT: ALERT: New Board Coming - Feedback Needed

[Clonamery]

all I want is a "VAPORIZE FNORD" option...and two new planet smilies...Mars and Uranus...for obvious reasons

Finally, something I can get one board with.

 

[Clonamery]

If there's one thing I would change it would be that there aren't enough posts per page and so it takes too long to look through a thread.

Thanks for all of your work, @Ian !

This site isn't about speed reading. It's not about agreeing and disagreeing with or without explanation or emoticons with "flourish" or even players made of glass, it's actually about Pat Patriot and the dirty SOB's that got rid of him in the most tasteless coup that ever hit the shores of New England with the most moronic logo in the history of marketing!!!

 

[Mike the Brit]

This site isn't about speed reading. It's not about agreeing and disagreeing with or without explanation or emoticons with "flourish" or even players made of glass, it's actually about Pat Patriot and the dirty SOB's that got rid of him in the most tasteless coup that ever hit the shores of New England with the most moronic logo in the history of marketing!!!

Thanks! I used to think it would be a good idea to read through a thread before joining it, in case someone had already said what I was about to. But now I realize that I'm probably too senile to remember it anyway ...

 

[maust]

So why not be annoyed when someone does a like/agree driveby? Would seem to have the same problem as disagrees/dislike. It is just because it gives you an ego boost so you're happy to get a like/agree with no explanation?

The idea of a forum being discussion I take no issue with random dislikes, they are better than a bunch of 'you're an idiot' / 'no you're a moron' type foolishness. Similarly likes/agree/funny being self explanatory hardly engender much in the way of conversation, 'you so funny' or 'that was clever' are just clutter. A disagreement on the other hand creates discourse. I would like to know why someone disagrees. I am always interested to know what I might have failed to consider or to hear the merits of an opposing view put forward in a civil way.

 

[GoBlue]

The "Quick Thread" feature is kind of cool if its one when users can post comments mostly during a game and users can see them flow. A RS forum i'm on using the xenFORO platform has what they call a "shoutbox" It's just running commentary mostly one liners.

 

[sb1]

My only pet peeve on this forum is when people do this. It's annoying when people just hit the disagree/dislike button but don't explain why. I saw Ian explain that it doesn't mean anything, but I feel if someone disagrees or dislikes a post, that person should explain to the other poster why. Other than that, no message board compares to this. Que someone hitting the dislike or disagree button.

I think number of dislikes or likes can be useful at the topic list level. If the list of topics shows a high number of likes or dislikes we can get a good idea of what to expect if we tap or click or what we missed if we don't.

 

[sb1]

I liked the old feature which showed you who was reading any given topic.

Also find that the view count tends to lag behind but keeping it realtime might require a SQL script that's not worth the load on the server.

 

[neuronet]

Dislikes/disagrees have no value at all - it's a zero vote aside from triggering the image. I changed that years ago after I kept having to delete them from people who went on a spree and it has no bearing on anyone's rep. So people who like to go around and hit them are wasting their time while making themselves look foolish.

I think a 'sad' emoticon would be useful. For stories where someone dies or whatever, there is really no good emoticon. 'Like' seems wrong. 'Userful' is the best, but seems sort of impersonal.

Also, 'anger' might be a good one. When someone posts a link to ESPN article that says 'Brady is a chump you won't believe reason 55' I don't want to dislike that person's post because they clearly aren't advocating the position, I would rather just say 'yo bruh that pisses me off.'

I trust your judgment on the site it is great. As long as I can still hide threads I don't want to see I'll be happy.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I would like to able to block certain people out completely like you can on facebook. Right now you can ignore someone but they can still read your posts and threads you start. I would prefer certain people not to be able to read anything that I write (and I don’t want to read what they post either).

 

[sb1]

I think a 'sad' emoticon would be useful. For stories where someone dies or whatever, there is really no good emoticon. 'Like' seems wrong. 'Userful' is the best, but seems sort of impersonal.

Also, 'anger' might be a good one. When someone posts a link to ESPN article that says 'Brady is a chump you won't believe reason 55' I don't want to dislike that person's post because they clearly aren't advocating the position, I would rather just say 'yo bruh that pisses me off.'

I trust your judgment on the site it is great. As long as I can still hide threads I don't want to see I'll be happy.

I like the "anger" idea. Right now if you dislike certain posts there's no way to tell if you're disliking the content of the post or if you're disapproving of the poster putting that content up.

 

[Clonamery]

I would like to able to block certain people out completely like you can on facebook. Right now you can ignore someone but they can still read your posts. I would prefer certain people not to be able to read anything that I write (and I don’t want to read what they post either).

Get thee to a nunnery (Dashiell Hammett)

 

[SHOWTIME15]

^^^^^A question mark emoji would be great for those posts/threads which come out of left field.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Also, a colored label at the beginning of each thread title that would indicate GDT (game day thread), player discussion, pregame talk, trade rumors, etc...just like they have on the hockey boards...

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/forums/tampa-bay-lightning.27/

 

[tasmlab]

Donated. Pizza and beer for your all nighter on me. Thanks for running the best site on the Internet, Ian.

 

[maust]

I would like to able to block certain people out completely like you can on facebook. Right now you can ignore someone but they can still read your posts and threads you start. I would prefer certain people not to be able to read anything that I write (and I don’t want to read what they post either).

 

[maust]

Get thee to a nunnery (Dashiell Hammett)

(saw what you did there)

 

[Bruins29]

I would like to able to block certain people out completely like you can on facebook. Right now you can ignore someone but they can still read your posts and threads you start. I would prefer certain people not to be able to read anything that I write (and I don’t want to read what they post either).

Arent you an attorney?

 

[maust]

Also, 'anger' might be a good one. When someone posts a link to ESPN article that says 'Brady is a chump you won't believe reason 55' I don't want to dislike that person's post because they clearly aren't advocating the position, I would rather just say 'yo bruh that pisses me off.'

Along similar lines maybe a caution/warning symbol might be a worthwhile addition to be used when a blind link goes to bspn or a paywall site

 

[Steve102]

I'd like the dead horse emoji back... just for those people that wont. let. it. go.

 

[Bruins29]

Get thee to a nunnery (Dashiell Hammett)

LOL

Give every man thine ear....