How can we make the 405th great?

[Art Andrews]

As mentioned elsewhere, we are very excited to be managing this community! We think it has a tremendous amount of potential and want to see it grow and flourish, but we need YOUR help to do that! This thread is for posting your thoughts and ideas about 1) existing changes as they are made and 2) changes you would like to see made.

Please bear in mind that there is only a handful of us and 10s of thousands of you, so we may not respond to every post or comment on every idea but we WILL read and consider every idea, comment and even criticism. Some things we should be able to implement quickly and easily while others may take time or not be feasible at all. Be patient with us as we already have a tremendous backlog of things that need to be done, but one-by-one, we will get to them.

 

[Zaff]

We already have them identified by underline.

The RPF

Yes, I do realize this, as I was one of the first people to point out that when the new format first rolled out links had no designation at all, thus the underline formatting was added. But underline can also be applied to absolutely any text whatsoever without any part of it actually being a link, thus it is not always easy to spot what is a link and what has merely been underlined for emphasis.

Case in point, Demogorgon's Destiny Ghost model thread. Demogorgon made a model and asked for someone to unfold it. I did, and posted a text link just as you did there with the RPF. Someone posted an unfold a week later, then someone posted another unfold the week after that, both saying they had not seen anyone else take on the task because they just skimmed the posts and did not see an http address and just assumed that nobody had posted an unfold. Three people doing the same job because an underlined bit of text was not enough to catch their attention. There was a problem, a solution was put in place, but it seems the problem still persists, so I am simply asking if an alternative solution would be possible. Colored text would stand out more than underlined text. If there's some other option you feel would make links more noticeable that's fine. I just wanted to bring it to your attention that links have gone unnoticed. Heck, I could have hidden a hundred different links in that first paragraph and unless someone went through letter by letter, nobody would ever know.

 

[Art Andrews]

Yes, I do realize this, as I was one of the first people to point out that when the new format first rolled out links had no designation at all, thus the underline formatting was added. But underline can also be applied to absolutely any text whatsoever without any part of it actually being a link, thus it is not always easy to spot what is a link and what has merely been underlined for emphasis.

Case in point, Demogorgon's Destiny Ghost model thread. Demogorgon made a model and asked for someone to unfold it. I did, and posted a text link just as you did there with the RPF. Someone posted an unfold a week later, then someone posted another unfold the week after that, both saying they had not seen anyone else take on the task because they just skimmed the posts and did not see an http address and just assumed that nobody had posted an unfold. Three people doing the same job because an underlined bit of text was not enough to catch their attention. There was a problem, a solution was put in place, but it seems the problem still persists, so I am simply asking if an alternative solution would be possible. Colored text would stand out more than underlined text. If there's some other option you feel would make links more noticeable that's fine. I just wanted to bring it to your attention that links have gone unnoticed. Heck, I could have hidden a hundred different links in that first paragraph and unless someone went through letter by letter, nobody would ever know.

Your argument would hold more water if we hadn't given you back the ability to change the color of your text. No matter what color we made the links, a member who wanted to be a pita could easily color their text to match, thereby masking links as well. If members choose to missue the software and hide links, well... there is not a lot we can do about it, but we aren't going to jump through hoops either. Underlines have worked quite well for communities much larger than this so underlines it is.

 

[Zaff]

Your argument would hold more water if we hadn't given you back the ability to change the color of your text. No matter what color we made the links, a member who wanted to be a pita could easily color their text to match, thereby masking links as well. If members choose to missue the software and hide links, well... there is not a lot we can do about it, but we aren't going to jump through hoops either. Underlines have worked quite well for communities much larger than this so underlines it is.

So because somebody MIGHT go out of their way to make something look like a link when it isn't, we shouldn't make a change that makes a link more noticeable when the other 99.9% want to post a legitimate link. THAT argument would hold more water if this was a community of inconsiderate idiots or even habitual practical jokers who don't know when to quit. Likewise your stand MIGHT hold more water if I hadn't just provided a recent example of not one, but TWO people missing an underlined link within the same thread and thus spent their time doing a job that had already been done rather than doing something more productive with their time, like actually building the model they wanted but thought hadn't been unfolded yet (you know, the whole reason why we're here to begin with).

I brought this up before the underline was added, and you listened. And I appreciate that. I brought it up again because the underline has proven to not be enough to catch people's attention. And you respond by saying somebody would just end up abusing or undermining the feature if you added another layer to make links stand out better? Nobody hid any links. I know because it was MY POST that had the link that everybody else missed and I wanted people to know the file had been unfolded. I'll repeat that, I WANTED THEM TO KNOW the file had been unfolded, so why the hell would I hide a link to the unfolded model? It's simply a matter of underlining alone not being enough to distinguish a LINK from regular TEXT so people skimmed right over the links because there was nothing to set them NOTICEABLY apart from the rest of the post. Do you know how roughly 90% of the internet marks text that's actually a link? They make it blue while the rest of the text on their site is black. Do you know what 90% of THOSE sites do to make links even more noticeable? They make the text blue AND underline it so that when someone looks at that bit of text, they know right away "there is something conspicuously different here compared to every other word on this page."

I'm sorry if I'm coming off hostile here but seriously, you made a change, I appreciate that you made a change, but the change failed to resolve the issue, and when a solution fails to solve a problem, it's time for a different approach, and using "well somebody somewhere MIGHT misuse this maybe" as an excuse for not taking the necessary steps to address a problem...well I have some choice words to describe that line of "thinking" and I'll keep them to myself as they aren't fit for polite company. This whole thread was created for members of the 405th to voice suggestions and problems in the hopes of getting improvements and solutions. Or have I misinterpreted what "How can we make the 405th great" means?

 

[Art Andrews]

So because somebody MIGHT go out of their way to make something look like a link when it isn't, we shouldn't make a change that makes a link more noticeable when the other 99.9% want to post a legitimate link. THAT argument would hold more water if this was a community of inconsiderate idiots or even habitual practical jokers who don't know when to quit. Likewise your stand MIGHT hold more water if I hadn't just provided a recent example of not one, but TWO people missing an underlined link within the same thread and thus spent their time doing a job that had already been done rather than doing something more productive with their time, like actually building the model they wanted but thought hadn't been unfolded yet (you know, the whole reason why we're here to begin with).

I brought this up before the underline was added, and you listened. And I appreciate that. I brought it up again because the underline has proven to not be enough to catch people's attention. And you respond by saying somebody would just end up abusing or undermining the feature if you added another layer to make links stand out better? Nobody hid any links. I know because it was MY POST that had the link that everybody else missed and I wanted people to know the file had been unfolded. I'll repeat that, I WANTED THEM TO KNOW the file had been unfolded, so why the hell would I hide a link to the unfolded model? It's simply a matter of underlining alone not being enough to distinguish a LINK from regular TEXT so people skimmed right over the links because there was nothing to set them NOTICEABLY apart from the rest of the post. Do you know how roughly 90% of the internet marks text that's actually a link? They make it blue while the rest of the text on their site is black. Do you know what 90% of THOSE sites do to make links even more noticeable? They make the text blue AND underline it so that when someone looks at that bit of text, they know right away "there is something conspicuously different here compared to every other word on this page."

I'm sorry if I'm coming off hostile here but seriously, you made a change, I appreciate that you made a change, but the change failed to resolve the issue, and when a solution fails to solve a problem, it's time for a different approach, and using "well somebody somewhere MIGHT misuse this maybe" as an excuse for not taking the necessary steps to address a problem...well I have some choice words to describe that line of "thinking" and I'll keep them to myself as they aren't fit for polite company. This whole thread was created for members of the 405th to voice suggestions and problems in the hopes of getting improvements and solutions. Or have I misinterpreted what "How can we make the 405th great" means?

I appreciate your concern and I have listened to your argument. This "issue" simply isn't on our radar nor do we feel it needs to be. It is unfortunate that you disagree.

 

[colbs]

Why not do the code for having a line going through the word for links instead of the underline?

 

[RobotChicken]

Why not do the code for having a line going through the word for links instead of the underline?

Because that would then look like "striked out" deleted text.

 

[Zaff]

Why not do the code for having a line going through the word for links instead of the underline?

Because that would then look like "striked out" deleted text.

And it's become apparent something simple isn't enough to draw people attention and make it clear that there's something significant to that text.

I appreciate your concern and I have listened to your argument. This "issue" simply isn't on our radar nor do we feel it needs to be. It is unfortunate that you disagree.

People not being able to see that an unfolded model is available and thus A) waiting around for no reason or B) putting time into unfolding said model instead of having that time for ANY more productive venture. People not realizing that a model even exists because they didn't realize that text was a link, thus their projects go nowhere. People putting in the time and effort to contribute something to this community only to have it skimmed over while people complain about it not being there. THAT is entirely unimportant to you? Why are we here? Why does the 405th even exist? To create, and to share, and it's really hard to do that when people can't find the links to what they're looking for because it blends into everything else. How is that NOT a problem? Seriously, I really do not get that. How is it not an important issue when the entire purpose for this community is hobbled over something that should not even be that big a deal to fix. You go to the format coding and change link format from underline to color. It takes more effort for you to argue with me and dole out flippant dismissals for four hours over this than it would take to fix the problem and make it easier for EVERYONE to find what they're looking for. Good gravy.

 

[dodgerfan2226]

Why not make a box around it and shade it in like a highlighted section. I would think that would make it more obvious. I don't think that would be too hard to do because it would just some css code. Maybe just have it highlight the full word with an obvious color.

 

[Zaff]

Why not make a box around it and shade it in like a highlighted section. I would think that would make it more obvious. I don't think that would be too hard to do because it would just some css code. Maybe just have it highlight the full word with an obvious color.

It would be even more simple just to change it from underline to color without needing boxes or highlights. A simple solution to a simple problem that has created a stumbling block to people pursuing the main intent and purpose of this site. That Ghost model was put out two weeks ago and you just posted your unfold last night. I don't know how much of that two week period you had put into unfolding it but that was time that you could have been able to spend on other things, like actually building your own Ghost and if the link had been more noticeable than just a bit of underlined text, that would have been possible.

 

[Art Andrews]

And it's become apparent something simple isn't enough to draw people attention and make it clear that there's something significant to that text.



People not being able to see that an unfolded model is available and thus A) waiting around for no reason or B) putting time into unfolding said model instead of having that time for ANY more productive venture. People not realizing that a model even exists because they didn't realize that text was a link, thus their projects go nowhere. People putting in the time and effort to contribute something to this community only to have it skimmed over while people complain about it not being there. THAT is entirely unimportant to you? Why are we here? Why does the 405th even exist? To create, and to share, and it's really hard to do that when people can't find the links to what they're looking for because it blends into everything else. How is that NOT a problem? Seriously, I really do not get that. How is it not an important issue when the entire purpose for this community is hobbled over something that should not even be that big a deal to fix. You go to the format coding and change link format from underline to color. It takes more effort for you to argue with me and dole out flippant dismissals for four hours over this than it would take to fix the problem and make it easier for EVERYONE to find what they're looking for. Good gravy.

Conveniently, you now have an entirely new piece of software that allows you to upload the file to the db here and skip those concerns.

405th File Archive

PS. I am trying to be gentle about this but since you want to belabor the point, let me be unequivocally clear. The answer is "no." Feel free to wax on as long as you want, but this matter is no longer open for debate on our end.

 

[Zaff]

Conveniently, you now have an entirely new piece of software that allows you to upload the file to the db here and skip those concerns.

405th File Archive

An on-site database for a group that you and others continually assert is for HALO, and with the Ghost being a Destiny model and Destiny "not being big enough to be on our radar," I didn't really think it would be welcome. Plus that is still a rather new feature. You have to remember, I've been here over two years. I'm use to the only database being on 4-Shared and there being a lengthy approval and filtration process before a file ever makes it there. Even so, that does not change the fundamental issue of links needing just a little bit more to make them conspicuous.

 

[Strider]

An on-site database for a group that you and others continually assert is for HALO, and with the Ghost being a Destiny model and Destiny "not being big enough to be on our radar," I didn't really think it would be welcome. Plus that is still a rather new feature. You have to remember, I've been here over two years. I'm use to the only database being on 4-Shared and there being a lengthy approval and filtration process before a file ever makes it there. Even so, that does not change the fundamental issue of links needing just a little bit more to make them conspicuous.

Comments are being taken out of context here I think. That database isn't just for Halo, contrary to what is being said. There's the Halo section, and the non-Halo section. Sure, maybe that portion can be expanded, but again as stated, Destiny hasn't really "blown up" in terms of builds and whatnot. Once it does, I'm sure it'll be broadened so that people are comfortable feeling like they can share stuff like that here. There's also not many Skyrim or Mass Effect builds as of recent here either, I'd assume due to a drop in popularity and other issues..

 

[rundown]

An on-site database for a group that you and others continually assert is for HALO, and with the Ghost being a Destiny model and Destiny "not being big enough to be on our radar," I didn't really think it would be welcome. Plus that is still a rather new feature. You have to remember, I've been here over two years. I'm use to the only database being on 4-Shared and there being a lengthy approval and filtration process before a file ever makes it there. Even so, that does not change the fundamental issue of links needing just a little bit more to make them conspicuous.

We have bin adding new sections that arn't only halo sections. We do however have our priorities to get the files added that are needed first.
And for filtration, I check every newly added file and edit them or delete them if needed.

And being a graphic designer myself. I think the links are great as they are. Why not just use a diffrent size for titles instead of underlining things? I don't even see why this would be sutch a problem to continue talking about.

 

[Zaff]

And being a graphic designer myself. I think the links are great as they are. Why not just use a different size instead of underlining things? I don't even see why this would be such a problem to continue talking about.

I subconsciously rolled my cursor over the words "Pepakura Modeler" in your signature to see if it lead to anything because that particular shade of blue text has, to me, always been an indicator of a link. It's a subconsciously imprinted response. And I don't imagine I'm the only one in the world or even in this group who has a similar response. Underlined, italicized, bold, strikeout, big letters, small letters, if it's all black text it's all black text. It blends in on a subconscious level. A little splash of color in an otherwise fairly monochromatic setup makes it really pop and grab people's attention. Being a graphic designer, Rundown, I'm sure you both understand and appreciate the value and importance of having something that really "grabs" someone.

Yea, the on-site database is a convenient and useful tool, but not every file ever posted gets there, and not everyone even thinks to post their models there. Most modelers tend to put their work up either in a continuously updating "portfolio" thread, or if they want to draw special attention to it, they'll create a new thread specifically for that model (much more common when said modeler would like someone to handle the unfolding while they work on their next piece). In the case of a model that needs unfolding, or an extracted model that needs refining, posting it right to the on-site database would just add useless clutter, so it makes more sense to post a link to an off-site download page.

Beyond that, when directing newer members to helpful threads, tutorials, or just pointing them towards existing threads where their questions should have been posed instead of starting a new thread, or towards youtube videos, product pages, and so forth, again distinct links are a boon. The underlining does an ok job at setting the links apart from the regular text, but as someone who rather frequently makes use of the formatting codes, it's not always enough of a differentiation. It's good, but not as good as it could be, and I would state not as good as it needs to be.

 

[rundown]

I subconsciously rolled my cursor over the words "Pepakura Modeler" in your signature to see if it lead to anything because that particular shade of blue text has, to me, always been an indicator of a link. It's a subconsciously imprinted response. And I don't imagine I'm the only one in the world or even in this group who has a similar response. Underlined, italicized, bold, strikeout, big letters, small letters, if it's all black text it's all black text. It blends in on a subconscious level. A little splash of color in an otherwise fairly monochromatic setup makes it really pop and grab people's attention. Being a graphic designer, Rundown, I'm sure you both understand and appreciate the value and importance of having something that really "grabs" someone.

Well thats a very 90's way of looking at links. If you would look at most popular websites nowadays links just look more plain, and are more part of the design of the website.

Yea, the on-site database is a convenient and useful tool, but not every file ever posted gets there, and not everyone even thinks to post their models there. Most modelers tend to put their work up either in a continuously updating "portfolio" thread, or if they want to draw special attention to it, they'll create a new thread specifically for that model (much more common when said modeler would like someone to handle the unfolding while they work on their next piece). In the case of a model that needs unfolding, or an extracted model that needs refining, posting it right to the on-site database would just add useless clutter, so it makes more sense to post a link to an off-site download page.

Well the 3d modeling section is still available for that. And the fact that not every pep file gets added is maybe because the file archive is just recently added...
Without the new file archive allot of files would be lost in time. 4shared accounts that get files taken down because of copyright, people deleting files for more space, links that are invallid,...
I've bin searching for weeks for particular files, still am looking for some as we speak.

Also, there won't be any clutter as I keep track of what gets added to the file archive, I've already deleted some files and Edited them if necessary

 

[RobotChicken]

Is there a thread here that lists all the supported BB tags for this site? I have too much going on to commit them all to memory, and I don't know if they're all covered by the toolbar buttons above the message text area. Like, how to "quote" somebody without actually citing a post of theirs. Either all the supported tags should be represented in the toolbar buttons or there should be a convenient and quick way for looking up the codes for this site, like a link in the Your Message frame that opens a closed thread in another window or tab that lists all the valid codes and what they do. Even if all the valid tags are in the toolbar, having a "glossary" would still be helpful to know what they do, how they work, and how to configure any arguments to them. For example, what do 'mention' tags do (besides simply wrapping selected text within mention tags)? (Not looking for an answer to that right here, just using it as one of the non-intuitive tag examples.) For new members coming to the site who have never posted on a BB before, a tags glossary documenting their usage could be quite helpful and also serve as reference material for veterans who haven't used certain tags in a while and need to refresh their bits.

It would be more efficient of screen real estate if the New Message toolbar utilized more of the empty space at the right and fewer rows. It seems configured now for very narrow browser windows and not laid out well for full-screen browsers. Rearranging and regrouping the buttons would condense the toolbars without taking away any features. Getting the toolbars onto 2 rows instead of 3 would yield two more visible lines in the text box.

It would also be slick if the area for typing a new message was a separate frame so the thread can be scrolled without the text entry area going off-screen. What I end up doing now is open the reply link in another window so I can still navigate the thread I'm responding to without messing up the text being entered. This way I can change thread pages and see different posts in the thread without losing my message text. But, then I'm also switching back and forth between multiple windows. Separating the New Message area to a separate frame would keep it visible on-screen while retaining full site navigation outside of the frame.

 

[WandererTJ]

How can we make the 405th great / improve the website?

Is there any way that when people visit a page and someone is editing a post, that there could a visual identifier that shows the post is actively being edited?

I ask for this because I find myself editing my posts a lot to say more, but it sucks when someone responds before I finish editing it and they might miss something I'm saying.

 

[Art Andrews]

Is there a thread here that lists all the supported BB tags for this site? I have too much going on to commit them all to memory, and I don't know if they're all covered by the toolbar buttons above the message text area. Like, how to "quote" somebody without actually citing a post of theirs. Either all the supported tags should be represented in the toolbar buttons or there should be a convenient and quick way for looking up the codes for this site, like a link in the Your Message frame that opens a closed thread in another window or tab that lists all the valid codes and what they do. Even if all the valid tags are in the toolbar, having a "glossary" would still be helpful to know what they do, how they work, and how to configure any arguments to them. For example, what do 'mention' tags do (besides simply wrapping selected text within mention tags)? (Not looking for an answer to that right here, just using it as one of the non-intuitive tag examples.) For new members coming to the site who have never posted on a BB before, a tags glossary documenting their usage could be quite helpful and also serve as reference material for veterans who haven't used certain tags in a while and need to refresh their bits.

It would be more efficient of screen real estate if the New Message toolbar utilized more of the empty space at the right and fewer rows. It seems configured now for very narrow browser windows and not laid out well for full-screen browsers. Rearranging and regrouping the buttons would condense the toolbars without taking away any features. Getting the toolbars onto 2 rows instead of 3 would yield two more visible lines in the text box.

It would also be slick if the area for typing a new message was a separate frame so the thread can be scrolled without the text entry area going off-screen. What I end up doing now is open the reply link in another window so I can still navigate the thread I'm responding to without messing up the text being entered. This way I can change thread pages and see different posts in the thread without losing my message text. But, then I'm also switching back and forth between multiple windows. Separating the New Message area to a separate frame would keep it visible on-screen while retaining full site navigation outside of the frame.

http://www.405th.com/misc.php?do=bbcode

 

[Art Andrews]

How can we make the 405th great / improve the website?

Is there any way that when people visit a page and someone is editing a post, that there could a visual identifier that shows the post is actively being edited?

I ask for this because I find myself editing my posts a lot to say more, but it sucks when someone responds before I finish editing it and they might miss something I'm saying.

There is nothing built into the software for this.

 

[Art Andrews]

I want to mention something here, and again, I am going to try to do it delicately, because we DO want your feedback, but a lot of what it being asked here, especially lately, deals with aspects of the actual functional code of the software (remember, this is a software package that is used by millions of members on hundreds of thousands of sites) in order to address "issues" that are extremely narrow in focus. You are more than welcome to post them, but you also have to realize that we are still trying to clean up a lot of old issues and still in the process of hammering out the club as well as a lot of other behind-the-scenes issues that impact the entire community. While I appreciate the input and feedback, don't be surprised if some of these more niche requests aren't addressed beyond "we can't do that" as the time and cost to have something coded that addresses something at that narrow of a focus wouldn't be in the best interest of the community's assets.

If these things are truly important to you, they are really something that would need to be addressed at the software maker's level. I'd be happy to link you up if you are interested.