OUR WONDERFUL SITE

[Stanley]

Eileen, from your mouth to God's ear! However, let time have its effect. How long have we been online with the new platform? We are dong well and once Google gets the indexing of the archive done we shall be back to normal and in far better condition than we were more than two months ago.

[Nolic]

There will always be people who want something for nothing. Nolic

[EileenDavid]

I thought it was me who was bolshi nice to know I am not a lone voice.

Eileen

[Belle]

Have you ever thought that banging on and on about donations is the very thing that is putting some people off donating?

[EileenDavid]

Hello Belle

Perhaps you are right who knows but everyone is allowed their own opinion and it shouldn't be taken personally it wasn't posted with malice. It's just a comment.

Eileen

[Nolic]

Belle, I make no apologies for "banging on and on". If you use the site and value it why not donate? I just cannot understand why people who obviously find some value in using the site can find some justification for not making a small contribution to its operation.
There are others who this applies to as well as you. Nolic

[Belle]

Eileen..not directed at you , and as you say everyone is entitled to their own opinions..Nolic I have explained it before but will attempt to do so again.. in my book a "donation" is unsolicited..where as it was perfectly possible for me to make donations to this site in the past..it has become less possible because I am being now being coerced by people to do so. If I make a donation I will do it when all the nonsense has died down, when people stop openly ridiculing and judging others, and if I cannot stop my name colour from changing or from others knowing about my donor status then I won't do it at all. It has nothing to do with the value I place on the site and everything to do with the ethics behind giving, and the attitudes of self righteousness being openly displayed.

[Nolic]

Belle, I would be more inclined to take notice of your "ethics" if you made a financial contribution to the well-being of the site. Nolic

[Belle]

Exactly.

[Stanley]

Belle, I saw a programme on TV about fare-dodging on the tube and it strikes me that your argument wouldn't carry a lot of weight with a ticket inspector. Sorry, but I can't understand the logic. Chacun a son gout.

[EileenDavid]

Hello all

Delicate subject, until I was told I didn't know why there were colours for different members. I wasn't even aware that donation was financial. I only donated to get rid of the adverts and speed up my computer thanks for the advise Stanley it zips in now.

Eileen

[Belle]

I think your statement gives me better understanding of how you see things Stanley..and I wonder if it would help you see the other point of view if I were to remind you that laws exist in this country which prevent charities from shaking their tins in peoples faces to procure donations. I have never had any problem with the idea of helping Doc out with the costs of a website he decided to set up and I just happened upon and enjoyed contributing to, but I do have a problem with people thinking that it is obligatory.
I worry that the attitude displayed by some in their attempts to help is actually putting people off, and comments that are an attempt to encourage are seen as offensive. I also think consideration needs to be given to the donor display as it may deter people from posting to know that their private choices are being displayed publicly. I would also respectfully remind you and Nolic that the ads carried by those who have not yet donated are also bringing a revenue to the site.

[Stanley]

"the ads carried by those who have not yet donated are also bringing a revenue to the site." No evidence of that Belle, Doc is waiting to see if there is any income. In the meantime the server rent has to be paid by someone. I like being a donor and don't mind who knows about that 'personal choice'. I've put in £30 this year. Far too much I know but it gives me a warm glow to know that I am doing my bit.

[Tizer]

An example of how much work Doc is putting in to make this site better - in this case to give us access to more of the old site too. Read the bit that is under the Tizer heading:
http://www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk/view ... 7451#p7451
The words "It's going to be a big priority project which I'm working on" say it all.

[Stanley]

Doc and I had a conversation yesterday on this. It's complicated because the full back up is a lot bigger than the snapshot and that's what he wants to transfer. You're right Tiz, he's working hard on it. Non donors should consider what this would cost if we had to employ a software engineer......

[Tizer]

Now hear up! - as those US marine sergeants shout on the telly...
I'm going to stick my neck out and contradict the title of this topic by saying that there is something not-so-wonderful about this OGFB site and ask what the members might do about it. I think that a big chunk of the site is under performing. This is not meant to criticise Doc, I think he's done (and is still doing) a great job in creating and fine tuning the new site but he probably needs the members to help by suggesting where it most needs a tweak. The problem I see is this...

Much of the posting activity seems to go on in the General Miscellaneous Chat & Gossip topic, and great fun it is too. But I've looked through the subforums and there are many languishing for want of posts and sub-topics, even though those subforums cover a very wide range of subjects. Have a look at the subforums here for instance:
http://www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=34
and note the number that have `No posts' against them. Drill down by clicking on some of those titles and you'll find the occasional topic that is active but most of those few that have any posts at all haven't been active for weeks.

Now I'm not suggesting that we should rush out and start creating posts just for the sake of populating these subforums to make OGFB look good, but something is not quite right here. It seems as if in most cases the topics that are started in these subforums die out very fast. Yes, I know there are some in there that are very active, but they are few and far between. So why is this? Are the members not interested in the forum topics or do they just not know that these subforums even exist? One reason for this problem, I believe, is down to a difference between the Home Pages of the present and old OG sites. On the old site the dominant component of the Home Page was a list of the `Last 30 topics':
http://archive.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk/
whereas on the new Home Page (`Portal') it's a list of sub-topics in the `General Miscellaneous Chat & Gossip' subforum:
http://www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk/portal.php
There is a list of `Most active topics' but that's not the same as a list of the `Most recent topics'. I think the present listing doesn't give enough chance to new topics before they disappear off the radar, and to less active topics which might have fewer posts but are still significant.

Over to you - what do other members think?

[PanBiker]

One reason for this problem, I believe, is down to a difference between the Home Pages of the present and old OG sites. On the old site the dominant component of the Home Page was a list of the `Last 30 topics':
http://archive.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk/
whereas on the new Home Page (`Portal') it's a list of sub-topics in the `General Miscellaneous Chat & Gossip' subforum:
http://www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk/portal.php
There is a list of `Most active topics' but that's not the same as a list of the `Most recent topics'. I think the present listing doesn't give enough chance to new topics before they disappear off the radar, and to less active topics which might have fewer posts but are still significant.

Over to you - what do other members think?

The portal page does list 25 latest topics as "Recent Topics". With the exception of the Newshound entries this is surely the same as the old site. This view of course is currently only visible on the portal page and gives way to the category / subforum views once inside the forum. Maybe this should be given prominence as a focal point when entering the forum after login.

[Whyperion]

I did raise an initial query on the problem of Subforums, Topics , and Posts , which is difficult to get ones head around, and the priority of summarising active and recent topics does need a bit more of a statistical tidy up.
The little menu on the Forum section of view latests posts is quite helpful , but does not stand out so maybe potential users are missing out.
We only have just over 300 registered users at present ( which is good or bad dependent on ones view ) , and only 10 or so active / visting , reading or posting per day. I also commented that the Hobbies and Pastimes section did not make entire sense between the doing and the reading ( eg under our anthying else forum we have a wildlife topic that really belongs in this section , but there is no clear sub section for it to fit in as the sections are all a little too specific.

I also took this subforum title to be just a tad ironic as well.

[Stanley]

Tiz, in some ways I agree and have commented on the fact that it takes a bit more effort to find topics but my solution is to go looking for them. I go through all the options most days and while it takes a bit longer, there are more new posts as well. Doc is on a hiding to nothing of course because he can't please everyone. Like the old site, this new platform is still in transition and will develop over the years.
Two quotations spring to mind, "You can't please all the people all of the time" and "Nothing is perfect. Pity then the web-master more than other men" (I paraphrase).
Patience, feedback and evolution are the keys. At the moment Doc is knee deep in data trying to get the archive fully functional, as big a job as putting the new platform up. Our job is to do our best to get the new platform through the transition by giving it full support with feedback in the form of suggestions. How long has the new platform been on line?

As for the title being ironic, that depends on your point of view and how long you have been a member. If you go back in the archive to the genesis of the title it was about the atmosphere and the way everyone helped each other to post solid research and information, particularly in the genealogy sections. If you want ironic, how about the fact that this particular comment comes from someone who can't even be bothered to donate £1. Now that is really ironic!

[Moh]

Well said. The thing I miss from the old site is that it was clear to see active topics from the last week, month etc. with a click of the mouse. Coming back from holiday was always much simpler because you could see what you had missed.

[Tizer]

The portal page does list 25 latest topics as "Recent Topics". With the exception of the Newshound entries this is surely the same as the old site.

Ian, as I said above, "on the new Home Page (`Portal') it's a list of sub-topics in the `General Miscellaneous Chat & Gossip' subforum" - i.e. it's different from the on the old site where the dominant component of the Home Page was a list of the `Last 30 topics'. When topics in the hobby subforums etc get posts they don't seem to feature in the new Home Page list, or if they do feature they're gone so fast that folk don't notice them.

Whippy has noticed this because he's made a number of posts and sub-topics in those lesser forums and they've disappeared fast. An example is his Morris Minor topic which I thought would be very interesting. At the time it started I was busy and by the time I went back to post in it, there it was, gone. This is the sort of problem I'm trying to point out. But as I said above I'm not in any way criticising Doc or any other person involved with running OGFB, I'm just trying to help the site get better. I'm not asking Doc to do anything, I just want us to discuss whether what I've described might be preventing OG getting a wider membership, especially in Barlick and its environs.

Stanley, you probably won't encounter what I'm describing or see it as a problem because you scour through everything on here. But 99% of members don't do that and they look for a quick way to see what's going on and to keep track of interesting topics. Those genealogy sections you mention will lose out because of this problem. Your own phrase `cathedral of choice' comes to mind - there are lots of ways of entering the OG forums but it's a b*gger trying to find the best one.

[PanBiker]

I have just taken this screenshot of the Recent Topics on the Portal Page:



You can see by the information at the bottom what criteria the data is based on, no doubt this could be tweaked. It looks like the majority of posts in the list are indeed from the Misc Chat and Gossip, but that is because this is the most prolific forum on the board. It is bound to have the most entries. The panel is representative of where the current action is though.There are others from other forums. So I think it is a case of finding a happy balance which is the difficult bit. I think losing the Newshound from this particular area though would leave more room for other posts.

[Stanley]

Tiz, I understand your point and mentioned it to Doc, the fact that the box at the bottom of the page with '7 days' in it didn't work if you asked for the last month. You're right, I have the time to dig a bit deeper than others so I can find the old posts. One thing that some members may have missed because it is very small print is that at the bottom right hand side of the page there is a facility that tells you there is more than one page of active topics, at the last time I used it yesterday there were three pages and I remember the Morris Minor post was on there.
The basic problem is of course that Doc can't do everything at once. Let's raise tweaks gently but not give him a hard time. His present task, making the archive more accessible is the priority at the moment and it's a big job. By the way he's noted the Newshound problem.
Thanks Moh, comment noted.

[Tizer]

I agree it would be better if the Newshound ones were removed from that list. Do they need to be individual topics? Perhaps Newshound would be better as one long thread. Your screenshot shows about 17 topics listed excluding the Newshound ones, whereas the old Home Page had 30 (it had no Newshound and no top forum titles in the list, only the thread titles), so we now see only about half of the recent `proper' topics.

The Home Page (Portal page) this morning consists of two pages and neither featured this thread I'm writing in now, yet Stanley posted to it at about 6am this morning. The thread is in the little box down the left-hand side but that's much less obvious than the big list centre page. Of course it doesn't appear on the Gen Misc Chat & Gossip forum listing because it's not in that forum.

Stanley's right about there being more than one page, which is probably obvious to those of us who are more familiar with forums. I find that there are many people who are less familiar with how forums work and they don't realise that the listings can continue to other pages, so you're right to mention it. But the `Recent Topics' list on the Home Page doesn't carry over to a further page so WYSIWYG!

I'm not wanting to create any more work for Doc. Our discussions here will continue to be available to him in the future if/when he has time to do anything. But I think it's better we are aware of anything that might be holding back the site, discuss it and be prepared when the time comes that a change can be made. In the meantime, there is a way we can help without Doc being involved. When we see a topic such as Whippy's Morris Minor one we could make sure that it's still `active' by `bumping' it now and then if it disappears (i.e. adding a post deliberately to make it active). You do this sometimes Stanley with older posts to bring them up again.

[Moh]

I wish I could remember to click on the last page small box instead of the main title