Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Greg

What improvements would you like to see in this discussion forum?

Recommended Posts

Since Greg is updating the forum, I have a request.

Can you modify the "Edited by" coding so that it only shows up after someone else has already replied to the thread? When you click submit and then notice typos or you want to clarify language, it shouldn't display the "edited by" message when no one has even replied the post yet. If you can't do it this way, at least have a timer where it doesn't come up unless the post has been edited more than two minutes later or something.

Yes, we all notice small problems after posting and jump back in to edit. The important point is the time-stamp on the edited by. Note that it is not just someone replying, but someone reading your message that is important. If the system knows for sure that nobody has read it then I agree that getting rid of the edited by makes sense, but I don't know the internals of the software to say if that is tracked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could add more forum sections. For example I wanted to share my make up videos but I could not find the related section for it and gave up.

Thé name of the forum is also a bit difficult to read and therefore difficult to remember. I often find it difficult to remember and use google seach history to join.

If I was you, I would open new topics everyday directly related with actual World politics and other actual news related with science or daily life for example.

I would close the chat section because chatting will cauae people's need to talk to reach at the saturation point.

If I was you, I would not allow any post related with users. We are here to talk about topics, not users.

You should use google ads and social media to make advertisement of the forum.

Edited by Altai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we all notice small problems after posting and jump back in to edit. The important point is the time-stamp on the edited by. Note that it is not just someone replying, but someone reading your message that is important. If the system knows for sure that nobody has read it then I agree that getting rid of the edited by makes sense, but I don't know the internals of the software to say if that is tracked.

I've figured out a way around it with the new setup. If I type a new post in the comment box, it will add my comment to the previous post as long as no one has added anything to the thread yet. It doesn't show that the post was edited either. So from now on, when I have something to add, I won't edit. I'll just type a new post and it will automatically consolidate things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a novel concept for improvement:

get rid of white supremacist posters and links to white supremacist websites.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16.01.2014 at 7:47 PM, Greg said:

I'd like to have a sincere discussion about what type of improvements we can make to the MLW forums. I want to attract more members, and I think the best way to do that is to appeal to the existing membership for ideas and opinions on what we could do to make this forum the best in class.

I'm not just interested in new forum features, but modifications to existing forum features. This is an open thread, so lets hear from everyone, but PLEASE keep it on topic. The sky is the limit, I'm interested in all suggestions.


- No trolls
- Active moderators
- Fresh topics everyday



You can examine the forums with high number of members and note what they are doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see the ability to give negative reps. I think they would be useful, not as "revenge' but to indicate when a post is considered unacceptable for the forum. One example of what I mean is when we get a new forum member come on here and posts something that is purposely inflammatory. New posters should never be allowed to do this, in my opinion the rules should be more strictly enforced at the beginning.

If forum members can give it negative reps, it helps to set the tone for the forum, and this could be useful for other potential new members, who might then be more willing to join and participate.

I suspect there is a persistent troll or trolls who come here in the guise of new members, then post something extremely right or left wing because they want to make the forum appear to be a shithole. I use the term shithole figuratively. If other members can give these posts a negative rep, and preferably if there is a bi-partisan repudiation of the post, it indicates that we don't encourage this kind of discussion. This is somewhat better than simply ignoring. When a post such as this is made, ignoring it simply leaves it up on the board with no rebuttal. I think that makes the forum look bad. Just my 2 cents, keep up the good work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had negative reps. although fewer than the positive, but removed them because of complaints.   I would suggest that new posters not be able to give out reps for say 3 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, scribblet said:

They had negative reps. although fewer than the positive, but removed them because of complaints.   I would suggest that new posters not be able to give out reps for say 3 months.

I don't recall hearing complaints, but then I don't quite read everything. I do recall "We are still experimenting".

Allowing members to give out negative reps is somewhat like giving us the ability to moderate one another. It is only symbolic, but might help to establish a baseline of acceptable forum behaviour promoted by the members themselves.

To be clear, I meant new posters should be closely scrutinized by the moderator and not permitted to make posts full of inflammatory rhetoric, even if the post was not reported by another member. Especially if it's a thread, because that creates the all-important headline. It only makes the forum look bad. For this reason some forums have a probationary period during which new members cannot start new threads, until they have posted a number of times. Others have similar restriction but use the moderator to decide if the new thread should be allowed, until they reach a certain threshold. This helps build trust that the new person is not a troll coming here to sabotage the forum.

So I suggest the following:
1) Allow negative reps.
2) New members cannot start new threads unless they reach a certain minimum post count, OR, new members threads are allowed but must be approved by the moderator. The minimum post count for the probationary period can be a fairly low, say 10 or 20. They get a message saying "You cannot make new threads during the probationary period until they are approved by a moderator. Your thread is being reviewed." etc
3) Any member who registers, posts a few things and does not return for a very long time, then suddenly reappears to make long inflammatory posts should go back on "probation" as in (2). It's is very likely "The Troll".

The troll wants to make this site look like a forum full of extremists and nut jobs, in order to convince others not to post here. My suggestions are an attempt to put a stop to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a new Canada General topic for all the things that might be going on in Canada which aren't strictly political and don't fit elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off-Topic Posts (Visible/Hidden) feature 

 

Spoiled - Off-Topic Posts (Visible/Hidden)

Off-topic thread derailment posts would be hidden from public view but could be made visible to members who chose to see them.  Members could flag their own derailment as a courtesy to everybody else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off-Topic Posts (Visible/Hidden) feature - can you be more specific? how would this feature be any different than what you've done above with existing features...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Greg said:

how would this feature be any different than what you've done above with existing features...?

What I did above hides a selection of the post.  

This hypothetical feature would deal with entire posts that are flagged Off-Topic and hidden for that reason.  Members would be able to see such Off-Topic posts -- say, by activating an extra feature in their profile settings.  

Members who do not want to see off-topic posts would not see a difference.  

 

This is may be more of a feature suggestion for the Invision software.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2019 at 11:15 AM, ProudConservative said:

spell checker!

Your browser should handle that functionality...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If possible, de-activation of the auto-quote feature would be good.  Quoting the entirety of a previous post should not be the default in a reply editor window.  

 

Here are some ideas presented by members of a different forum: 

Collabsible quotes? -- Electric Unicycle Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Charles Anthony said:

If possible, de-activation of the auto-quote feature would be good.  Quoting the entirety of a previous post should not be the default in a reply editor window.  

Here are some ideas presented by members of a different forum: 

Collabsible quotes? -- Electric Unicycle Forum

Didn't seem to be 'some ideas'. Seemed to be all about quotes. I always split longer posts up, delete what I'm not replying to, and only retain the pertinent pieces. I don't know why others don't as it's convenient even for the other guy who has to then reply to me.

You could keep it simple and put in a hack that says your quoted text can't be longer than your response...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2020 at 4:43 PM, Argus said:

I always split longer posts up, delete what I'm not replying to, and only retain the pertinent pieces. I don't know why others don't as it's convenient even for the other guy who has to then reply to me.

No kidding.  Doing this should preclude most attempts by doofuses who inject constant deflections, strawmen, whataboudisms and disingenuous nonsense into a thread as well but...  If there's anything a moderator or panel thereof could be doing to clean this place up is to make debating adhere more to the sort of rules that judges and moderators use in more formal matches.  The pitbull ring is fun I suppose and let's face it the quality of discourse out in the real world really isn't much better so it is what it is I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...