Better, than the test site, blander than the past.

[Twiglard]

I'm not sure it matters that much anymore considering long quotes have to be expanded now.

Fanta can no longer derail threads (by quote pyramid anyway).

And the indent before each quote is smaller so it takes quite a lot of messages to fuck up the layout with the nesting.

 

[Gargaune]

Twiglard or Taluntain , not sure which one of you would know, but I've got a question about the way Images behave inside Quote tags on the new platform. On the old forum, they'd show as shrunk previews that would expand in an overlay when clicked, so you could essentially create thumbnail galleries like I did in this Fo4 TCs thread. On the new platform, though, it shows like the top 20% of the first image at full width and everything else is hidden under a Click to Expand that works in the post body itself.

Interestingly, though, you now have a "shrink" behaviour like that for the embedded video using Media tags between Quote tags, I tested it, so a similar functionality still exists in the software.

Would it be possible to have images in quotes borrow this "shrink" behaviour from videos in quotes so we can still create thumbnail galleries inside posts like before?

 

[Twiglard]

Would it be possible to have images in quotes borrow this "shrink" behaviour from videos in quotes so we can still create thumbnail galleries inside posts like before?

Click on the image inside the editor. Manual scaling always preserves aspect ratio. Nifty.

 

[Taluntain]

That layout looked ok in 2002. What Twiglard's got up now looks considerably better, so no. You already pushed one change for the worse.

Imagine being Admin of a forum were people play games that are half a century old and coming with [current year] argument. Why would something look ok in one year and not in another?

Right, people only play 50 year old games here, nothing newer.

The obvious answer is advancement in technology and design, where something old looks and feels dated and clashes with the upgrade in underlying forum technology to boot.

That layout looked ok in 2002. What Twiglard's got up now looks considerably better, so no. You already pushed one change for the worse.

Imagine being Admin of a forum were people play games that are half a century old and coming with [current year] argument. Why would something look ok in one year and not in another?

The takeaway is that Taluntain really hated the design and look of the forum that we had for a decade or more. Or he has some weird “conservatards like the old, so I will push for the new“ idea that he clings to.

In what world is the current uninspired, bland and amateurish looking mess of a front page looking better than what we had before?

The takeaway is that you like to make shit up. I didn't "hate" the old design. It was ok for the time period when it was made. It was already less optimal when it was recreated years later with no real updates. Twiglard's current version is faithful to the extent that makes sense and looks good. That's it. Plus it's not even finished yet, since the whole header is missing.

Your "uninspired, bland and amateurish" remarks are completely off and I thoroughly disagree with them. You're simply going by personal preference where you've demonstrated in a number of examples that the only thing that you consider to be "good" is 20 year old design with all its flaws and no updates whatsover. As such your critical observations really have zero merit.

That layout looked ok in 2002.

Just FYI, this what his sorcerers.net website looks like:

View attachment 25272

That amateurish looking layout actually does look like it is straight from 2002.

Heh, that's because it pretty much is from 2002. If I had a coder and part designer like Twiglard at my disposal, I'd have changed it ages ago. The only reason why it hasn't been done yet is because SP is primarily a downloads and guides website where people don't care about the layout but only about the content. So the backend update made a couple of years ago was far more important than fixing up the clunky retro look.

So yea, you're proving nothing with your red herring because as usual, you're talking about things that you don't have the necessary background knowledge of.

so for a while when you quoted it only included the last reply and not the whole thing cutting down quote pyramids
I liked that, why was it rolled back

Because quote pyramids are apparently something that nobody here can live without. Personally, I think that's ridiculous.

 

[Gargaune]

Click on the image inside the editor. Manual scaling always preserves aspect ratio. Nifty.

Huh! Hold on...

Hot damn! That's awesome, man, thanks! Don't suppose there's some function that lets readers expand to full size other than opening the image in a new tab? It's not a problem, just curious if there's some other feature I wasn't aware of. Scratch that, it already does it, I just couldn't see it in the post preview, this is a lovely upgrade. It really just works™.

 

[Twiglard]

Don't suppose there's some function that lets readers expand to full size other than opening the image in a new tab? It's not a problem, just curious if there's some other feature I wasn't aware of.

Try clicking on it once it's posted?

 

[Taluntain]

Click on the image inside the editor. Manual scaling always preserves aspect ratio. Nifty.

Huh! Hold on...

Hot damn! That's awesome, man, thanks! Don't suppose there's some function that lets readers expand to full size other than opening the image in a new tab? It's not a problem, just curious if there's some other feature I wasn't aware of. Scratch that, it already does it, I just couldn't see it in the post preview, this is a lovely upgrade. It really just works™.

You literally just click on it. And again.

Edit: twiglar'd.

 

[Gargaune]

Try clicking on it once it's posted?

You literally just click on it. And again.

Yep, corrected, I only realised after I posted because it wasn't in the Post Preview. Thanks again, guys, much appreciated!

 

[agris]

Is it (a) possible and (b) worthwhile to implement a method to see the total number of people

1. Reading a forum
2. Reading a sub-forum (like the subs in GRPG)
3. Reading a thread?

These seem like pro-community options that aren't antithetical to our grouchy demeanor.

 

[Nano]

First Taluntain said the redesign was only a minor visual change. Now he says the site looks better and the previous design is ugly because "grow up it's CurrentYear lmao fuck you". I'm not sure whether he's lying or taking copium.

Your "uninspired, bland and amateurish" remarks are completely off and I thoroughly disagree with them. You're simply going by personal preference where you've demonstrated in a number of examples that the only thing that you consider to be "good" is 20 year old design with all its flaws and no updates whatsover. As such your critical observations really have zero merit.

The old design had no flaws, you fucking cunt.

 

[Lord of Riva]

Right, people only play 50 year old games here, nothing newer.

The obvious answer is advancement in technology and design, where something old looks and feels dated and clashes with the upgrade in underlying forum technology to boot.

I get technology, but design? How does that relate? Is it technologically necessary to have shit design?

Most shit is decidedly decline (in general, not necessarily because it's new) and the things that are not do not cater to things deemed "progressive" but rather to things innovative and unique. Your argument is kinda shit, as before. It's your thing, I will survive, but if you argue maybe just say you want to have it you way because you like it instead of trying to sell a shit sandwich.

You should know, as admin, the IQ distribution on the board is easily over 65 don't underestimate your audience.

 

[Humanophage]

Can we try to make the front page look like this again?

One of the worst things about the current front page is that it's too spaced-out. It is annoying to scroll down every time, and I wouldn't be surprised if it would reduce engagement.

Codex now has about 9 forums on the starting screen, compared to about 13 on Kiwifarms: https://kiwifarms.net/

It's especially pointless to have those very tall subsections like "Gaming discussion" and "Off-topic discussion" that aren't even clickable. Just make them very small.

 

[Taluntain]

Is it (a) possible and (b) worthwhile to implement a method to see the total number of people

1. Reading a forum
2. Reading a sub-forum (like the subs in GRPG)
3. Reading a thread?

These seem like pro-community options that aren't antithetical to our grouchy demeanor.

I'm pretty sure all of these are already available, just turned off right now as the deeper you go, the more resource usage is taken up by them. But it probably wouldn't be an issue turning them on.

First Taluntain said the redesign was only a minor visual change. Now he says the site looks better and the previous design is ugly because "grow up it's CurrentYear lmao fuck you". I'm not sure whether he's lying or taking copium.

Your "uninspired, bland and amateurish" remarks are completely off and I thoroughly disagree with them. You're simply going by personal preference where you've demonstrated in a number of examples that the only thing that you consider to be "good" is 20 year old design with all its flaws and no updates whatsover. As such your critical observations really have zero merit.

The old design had no flaws, you fucking cunt.

Lol. Yes, the minor visual changes that come pretty much only from how the current XF2 layout used as the base is laid out on the back end do look better. Twiglard's spent an insane amount of time adding back millions of details from the old layout wherever it made sense and even in dozens of places where it didn't, solely to placate a handful of vocal nitpicking complainers here. He's gone up to and beyond what made sense in making the layout match the old one in every detail that even remotely mattered. That some Codexers will never be happy is a given, but that's the case with everything else on the Codex as well. The real trap isn't making a few minor changes but doing everything as dictated by a very vocal minority that likes to fling shit and insults around if they don't get exactly what they want.

Right, people only play 50 year old games here, nothing newer.

The obvious answer is advancement in technology and design, where something old looks and feels dated and clashes with the upgrade in underlying forum technology to boot.

I get technology, but design? How does that relate? Is it technologically necessary to have shit design?

Most shit is decidedly decline (in general, not necessarily because it's new) and the things that are not do not cater to things deemed "progressive" but rather to things innovative and unique. Your argument is kinda shit, as before. It's your thing, I will survive, but if you argue maybe just say you want to have it you way because you like it instead of trying to sell a shit sandwich.

You should know, as admin, the IQ distribution on the board is easily over 65 don't underestimate your audience.

Again with the "shit design". This is your subjective opinion, I don't agree with it and a lot of other people here who said that they like the current style don't either.

The forums have the technical back-end and the GUI/style/skin. They go hand in hand as all the forum functionality available to regular users is accessed via the style. So any changes to the underlying tech necessitate some updates of the layout as well. XF2 is a huge advancement from XF1 technologically (the part invisible to the end user) even though outwardly it largely feels the same. So the default layout, just like the entire forum code, has been redone from scratch and 1:1 copying of certain minor style details is not possible without investing an unreasonable amount of time for a change that basically amounts to practically nothing visually, or would actually look dated or clunky in combination with the other style elements. As I said before, Twiglard's gone up to and beyond what made sense in terms of changes. Anything past this is simply wasting time changing things for no reason other than the fallacy of "it was like that before which means that it was better". There are cases where that hold true, sure. But not in every single instance 100% of the time and definitely not in a fashion that would be meaningful.

 

[Taluntain]

Codex now has about 9 forums on the starting screen, compared to about 13 on Kiwifarms: https://kiwifarms.net/

They can do that because they keep their forum descriptions very short. Could be achieved here as well, but the descriptions would have to be condensed to a few words. I'm not sure how practical that would be.

It's possible to put the forum descriptions in tooltips and hide them entirely, but in my experience that means that most people will either never find/notice that these tooltips even exist, or not read them anyway as reading tooltip text is more annoying than when it's laid out on the page.

Thinking about it, the best solution would be condensed text descriptions, with an option to expand them to full length on click of either some text or icon. This isn't possible with the default options right now, but Twiglard could probably set it up easily enough. Would take some work redoing the descriptions, though.

 

[Lady Error]

Twiglard's spent an insane amount of time adding back millions of details from the old layout wherever it made sense and even in dozens of places where it didn't, solely to placate a handful of vocal nitpicking complainers here.

Well, let's see if we are just a handful of vocal complainers here:

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/front-page-layout-old-vs-new-poll.143536/

And maybe let Twiglard speak for himself as far as how much he is willing to adjust the design further if people are in favor of changes.

 

[Taluntain]

I'm sure that you and everyone else dead set on "proving" your point will bring out every alt to inflate your count, whereas those happy with the progress being made so far don't really care either way. So the legitimacy of such polls is close to zero and it only serves to highlight your attention seeking; I should point that out as it might not be apparent to everyone.

Edit: the fact that Lady Error is spamming the link to his poll in a bunch of threads now just compounds this fact.

 

[Duraframe300]

Good work Taluntain DarkUnderlord

Liking it much more now. Mostly have nitpicks now.

 

[Lady Error]

I'm sure that you and everyone else dead set on "proving" your point will bring out every alt to inflate your count

It's easy to distinguish regular poster from no names in the poll, so stop with this "you bring out all the alts" paranoia please.

And neither am I "spamming" the link to the poll. I posted it in one other thread in Site Feedback besides this one.

Considering that you are pre-emptively trying to delegetimize the poll shows how much you believe in your own "it's only a vocal minority" claim.

 

[Taluntain]

I'm sure that you and everyone else dead set on "proving" your point will bring out every alt to inflate your count

It's easy to distinguish regular poster from no names in the poll, so stop with this "you bring out all the alts" paranoia please.

And neither am I "spamming" the link to the poll. I posted it in one other thread in Site Feedback besides this one.

Considering that you are pre-emptively trying to delegetimize the poll shows how much you believe in your own "it's only a vocal minority" claim.

Not really, but you're free to believe what you want, of course. By default any such forum poll will only include an interested minority (those who are opposed to something are infinitely more interested than everyone else) of an already minority of site users (registered forum users who can vote), plus the Codex has the disadvantage of the fact that there are few vocal Codex users who don't have an alt or three at their disposal, so you need to take all that into account when assessing the relevancy and worth of every such poll. Especially when it comes to polls where the poll starter has a clear agenda of wanting to steer the vote into alignment with his own subjective view.

 

[agris]

plus the Codex has the disadvantage of the fact that there are few vocal Codex users who don't have an alt or three at their disposal

You keep saying this, but what evidence do you offer? In my experience, it is a few very high visibility posters with high likelihood of mental illness who fit this description, not anything remotely approaching a majority of “vocal” users.

It does read as a paranoid conspiracy to fight your personal preference.

You are right that a lot of this discussion comes down to your preference vs the preference of others. Yet, what personally bothers me is how dismissive you are of others’ perspective *combined with* a dismissive attitude towards our only way to demonstrate the prevalence of opinions - polls!

You continue to make weak appeals to authority, “modern norms”, “modernity”, “modern web design”, while denigrating people who are providing very detailed and nuanced feedback. You clearly find it a distraction and annoying, but you are flippantly dismissing a valuable resource. Very frequently in art and technology, great things are made by those with a close eye towards detail.

At the bare minimum you could cop to not wanting to deal with feedback and appoint someone else who has the faculty to do such, to do it.

 

[Taluntain]

You keep saying this, but what evidence do you offer? In my experience, it is a few very high visibility posters with high likelihood of mental illness who fit this description, not anything remotely approaching a majority of “vocal” users.

We identify the alts on the staff back-end all the time. It's not only limited to the mentally ill, not even remotely.

You are right that a lot of this discussion comes down to your preference vs the preference of others. Yet, what personally bothers me is how dismissive you are of others’ perspective *combined with* a dismissive attitude towards our only way to demonstrate the prevalence of opinions - polls!

The veracity of the polls is a problem, sure. But I also think that it's way too early to be making any polls since the layout isn't even finished yet, combined with the fact that opposition to any change is a natural human defense mechanism to maintain the comfort of the known, which is only several times more expressed on the Codex due to the nature of its audience. Making such a poll after a couple of months of the users' experience with what would be considered the finished version of the layout? Sure, makes sense to me.

Trying to force regressions based on a few days' experience using a work-in-progress layout? Not reasonable.

You continue to make weak appeals to authority, “modern norms”, “modernity”, “modern web design”, while denigrating people who are providing very detailed and nuanced feedback. You clearly find it a distraction and annoying, but you are flippantly dismissing a valuable resource. Very frequently in art and technology, great things are made by those with a close eye towards detail.

To you every appeal I make is weak because you don't agree with it. That's the reality of the situation. I can reduce your "very detailed and nuanced feedback" to unnecessary nitpicking same as you reduce my every argument to irrelevance because you don't even want to consider it. The difference is, Twiglard and I have implemented pretty much every reasonable and sensible nitpick already, so saying that you aren't being heard is disingenuous. Like Lady Error, you simply aren't willing to accept any reasonable change and/or compromise. So I think that there's a lot of projecting going on here, because Twiglard and I have been bending left and right to make changes in line with the old layout wherever it made any possible sense (and even plenty of cases where it didn't), but I see very little of the same kind of cooperation on the opposing end. Especially when your definition of "dealing with feedback" is "making it my way".

 

[agris]

Taluntain i appreciate your replies, but I am not saying that I am not heard - maybe that’s how you’re reading my posts, but they are much more specific than that. They are critiques of how you are parsing and pushing back against feedback, specifically.

I ask you to hold two thoughts in your mind (1) you and the team are doing a commendable job in restoring the unique visual style of the codex, and (2) there is a subset of recommendations that you treat flippantly, with poor justification that appears designed to disguise the true reason for you dismissal of it: you don’t like the suggestion.

Lazy quoting:

>> To you every appeal I make is weak because you don't agree with it. That's the reality of the situation.

That is the exact opposite of how I feel! They are weak because they are not specific. An appeal to norms or authority is generic, and uses all sort of faulty assumptions regarding modernity being good or better, without you having to make the *specific arguments* about why the much vaunted 2022 webdesign norms are better than whatever is being suggested - for this user base.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

The Parrot button rating is awaiting its freedom:

The Parrot ratings have been freed!

Thanks, Twiglard!

 

[Taluntain]

Taluntain i appreciate your replies, but I am not saying that I am not heard - maybe that’s how you’re reading my posts, but they are much more specific than that. They are critiques of how you are parsing and pushing back against feedback, specifically.

I ask you to hold two thoughts in your mind (1) you and the team are doing a commendable job in restoring the unique visual style of the codex, and (2) there is a subset of recommendations that you treat flippantly, with poor justification that appears designed to disguise the true reason for you dismissal of it: you don’t like the suggestion.

Lazy quoting:

>> To you every appeal I make is weak because you don't agree with it. That's the reality of the situation.

That is the exact opposite of how I feel! They are weak because they are not specific. An appeal to norms or authority is generic, and uses all sort of faulty assumptions regarding modernity being good or better, without you having to make the *specific arguments* about why the much vaunted 2022 webdesign norms are better than whatever is being suggested - for this user base.

I'm not pushing against feedback. I'm pushing against trying to be pushed into regressions that I know not to be beneficial. There's a big difference there. I'm convinced that I've explained my reasoning dozens of times from a number of different angles here already but the negative replies always basically come down to "don't care / what we had before was better". And these negative replies are constantly coming from a very limited subset of users, when we've constantly got a few hundred people online. Keep that perspective in mind from my POV.

 

[agris]

Taluntain a humble suggestion then. When you get feedback that you are disinclined to implement, assuming it’s reasonable and not coming from an insane poster like sumdrunkguy, write it down and say something to the effect of you don’t think it makes sense now but can evaluate when the style is more refined. And make that list a google doc or something.

Your earlier point about the design not being finalized yet is a fair one. And your philosophy is clearly that the focus on the old design borders on fetishism and a regression in functionality. Set aside those aspects, recognize the feedback, and if you aren’t inclined to implement it now at least document it and leave the door open for consideration in the future. Almost all the feedback given in this thread has been good natured, especially mine and Lady Error ‘s. I’m sure others but I’m only sporadically reading this.

Just a suggestion. You gotta keep the natives from getting too restless during this transition period.