logo Sign In

New Forum Layout

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I, for one have to say that i don't like the new "slim" forum layout. Whereas before the layout filled the screen, the new layout just leaves huge empty spaces either side which looks terrible. Also it is now cutting off pictures in the forum even worse than before (which had been fixed)

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Even the picture i have posted has been cropped on the right hand side, yet it shows fully when editing a post and previewing it

Also there is a problem when the last part of your post is a picture and you preview it, you can't get the cursor to be placed after the picture if you want to add anything else

Any chance we could have a choice between the old wider layout & the new one or maybe please give us back the wider layout

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time

It is real narrow for me as well,wasted space on the sides.

Author
Time

I don't mind the new format. 

I am especially thrilled that a new petition is posted.

-Mark Johnson #25

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I'm going to put together a wide layout skin as an option, but it will apply to the forum only. What some view as wasted space, others view as a layout more appropriate for actual reading.

Another "light" skin will be available soon. I just didn't have time to get it ready for this update.

Regarding images...I'm working on something. I know it's annoying when the images get clipped, but honestly, all these giant images have no business being embedded directly in forum posts anyway. It makes pages take much longer to load for those on slower connections, and I'm regularly annoyed by the "jumps" that occur when I use the first unread post link on a topic, drop down to that post, and the contents continue to shift as images load at the top of the page. This doesn't happen all the time (God bless FIOS), but when the server is busy, it's annoying as hell.

All I can suggest for now is using links to images instead of embedding them. It's entirely likely I'll disable the ability to dump full-size images in posts.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

I also miss the choice of lighter blue, which was easier on my failing eyes.

Seconded (well, except for the "failing" part).

And here's an actual bug (I think).  I now can't see the quote box when typing my reply, so it's harder to tell what is in the box and what isn't.  But when I post the reply, I can see the box.  Weird.

Jay said:

Regarding images...I'm working on something. I know it's annoying when the images get clipped, but honestly, all these giant images have no business being embedded directly in forum posts anyway. It makes pages take much longer to load for those on slower connections, and I'm regularly annoyed by the "jumps" that occur when I use the first unread post link on a topic, drop down to that post, and the contents continue to shift as images load at the top of the page. This doesn't happen all the time (God bless FIOS), but when the server is busy, it's annoying as hell.

Completely agree with this.  I hate the jumps also.

Author
Time

Wide skin would be very nice.

A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em

Author
Time

And here's an actual bug (I think).  I now can't see the quote box when typing my reply, so it's harder to tell what is in the box and what isn't.  But when I post the reply, I can see the box.  Weird.

I see this also. I'll take a look at it tonight.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

Jay said:

I'm going to put together a wide layout skin as an option, but it will apply to the forum only. What some view as wasted space, others view as a layout more appropriate for actual reading.

Another "light" skin will be available soon. I just didn't have time to get it ready for this update.

Regarding images...I'm working on something. I know it's annoying when the images get clipped, but honestly, all these giant images have no business being embedded directly in forum posts anyway. It makes pages take much longer to load for those on slower connections, and I'm regularly annoyed by the "jumps" that occur when I use the first unread post link on a topic, drop down to that post, and the contents continue to shift as images load at the top of the page. This doesn't happen all the time (God bless FIOS), but when the server is busy, it's annoying as hell.

All I can suggest for now is using links to images instead of embedding them. It's entirely likely I'll disable the ability to dump full-size images in posts.

yeh, i've got to say that some of the images are getting ridiculously large now and many not even compressed. Maybe restrict images to imageshack thumbnails or something similar, maybe even change the "insert/edit image" icon in the reply tab to turn any images into thumbnail links?

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Sorry to leap from area to area to make these points (I wouldn't count a format change as a bug and didn't see this thread until I looked around).

Images that illustrate a point should (in my view) be largely discernible at a glance.

It brakes the flow of a discussion if you have to click on an image to see it at all.

I'd prefer to have a reasonable standard size limit which can be clicked on to get a better look so people following the thread can make out what the postee meant without clicking but if they want to put the effort in they can make the effort to open up the full sized image.

Having a row of in thread links might speed up the loading times but it may slow down the flow of appreciation of the ideas presented on the page (an image can sometimes be worth a thousand words and the extra loading time).

Archived images from early on in older posts could also be adjusted to meet the new size limit.

Many people like to back track on older threads and when images go missing or are cropped short by format changes it can undermine following a long lived thread.

A wider format would be most welcome.

Discussion forums are for reading and small text compressed into the centre of the screen doesn't necessarily lead to a better reading experience.

As before thank-you for taking the time to maintain this site and for offering us viewing options rather than just imposing a look because you like it (sadly a lot of forums have bitten the dust because they are run by people without your open minded attitude to updates).

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

And here's an actual bug (I think).  I now can't see the quote box when typing my reply, so it's harder to tell what is in the box and what isn't.  But when I post the reply, I can see the box.  Weird.

Should work now.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

Discussion forums are for reading and small text compressed into the centre of the screen doesn't necessarily lead to a better reading experience.

On the contrary, would you enjoy reading a book that was 3 feet wide and had small text?

Most people find it easier to read text that is contained in a smaller area than text that is spread out across a wide space because it's easier for your eyes to follow down to the next line.

My Projects:
[Holiday Special Hybrid DVD v2]
[X0 Project]
[Backstroke of the West DVD]
[ROTS Theatrical DVD]

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Zion said:

Most people find it

easier to read text

that is contained in

a smaller area than

text that is spread

out across a wide

space because it's

easier for your eyes

to follow down to the

next line.

So you like posts that look like they were typed on the telestrator that newscasters read from?

My outlook on life - we’re all on the Hindenburg anyway…no point fighting over the window seat.

Author
Time

I'll just quote myself from the other topic in Feature Requests:

Jay said:

I'm glad I get feedback like this and definitely want to continue this discussion. I'm a huge proponent of usability and want to hear from everyone.

While I see many forums with layouts that expand to fit the available space, I see very few good web sites that do. I don't understand--at all--how people read long forum posts on a widescreen monitor with lines of text that stretch into infinity. I think Windows has done a horrible job of training people over the last 10 years to expect windows to fill all available space and for the content to follow suit; ironically, one of the things Windows has always done worse than Mac is managing the actual windows :)

In my experience, moving from variable width to fixed width is jarring at first simply because it's different. Once people become accustomed to it, going back to variable width looks strange...mostly because it is. Shifting blocks of content to make better use of available space is fine and makes sense with web content expected to be viewed on monitors of various sizes, but stretching out the text on linear user-based content so it flows across an entire widescreen monitor is simply bizarre, and a fine example of learned behavior.

I'm not entirely sure why you feel the need to increase the zoom level on your browser here, but not elsewhere. We use a pretty standard 12 pixel font size for posts (typical for forums and larger than a lot of sites). The quote font size is smaller so it takes up less space, but I'm working on a solution for that as well (showing only the first few lines of a quote and letting the user hover/click to view the rest). None of these things have changed in the new layout and they won't change if I add a skin that's variable width. I am concerned to hear that you find that this site requires more zooming than others, so please post more thoughts on this point if you can.

I'm working on the image solution. I know it's a problem. But, as I said here, all these large images are a nuisance and they have to go. Again, only in forums do I see this kind of content. Good sites manage images much more cleanly through thumbnails and zooming. Large images embedded within the content simply don't work on the web. Users should be linking to these images, not embedding them.

Fixed width vs. variable width is a longstanding debate, and like all usability decisions, what works for many or most people will leave a few people displeased because people are different. The best you can do is choose what you think is the best decision based on your experience and then provide an easy out for those who don't fit into that mold--in this case, an optional variable width layout.

 

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

Ziz said:

Zion said:

Most people find it

easier to read text

that is contained in

a smaller area than

text that is spread

out across a wide

space because it's

easier for your eyes

to follow down to the

next line.

So you like posts that look like they were typed on the telestrator that newscasters read from?

If the forum looked like that, you'd have a point. In fact, it does not.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

Jay said:

TV's Frink said:

And here's an actual bug (I think).  I now can't see the quote box when typing my reply, so it's harder to tell what is in the box and what isn't.  But when I post the reply, I can see the box.  Weird.

Should work now.

Works.  Thanks.

Author
Time

Jay said:

Ziz said:

Zion said:

Most people find it

easier to read text

that is contained in

a smaller area than

text that is spread

out across a wide

space because it's

easier for your eyes

to follow down to the

next line.

So you like posts that look like they were typed on the telestrator that newscasters read from?

If the forum looked like that, you'd have a point. In fact, it does not.

I know it doesn't literally look like that, but that's what it can feel like if it gets too thin.

My outlook on life - we’re all on the Hindenburg anyway…no point fighting over the window seat.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bingowings said:

Images that illustrate a point should (in my view) be largely discernible at a glance.

It brakes the flow of a discussion if you have to click on an image to see it at all.

I'd prefer to have a reasonable standard size limit which can be clicked on to get a better look so people following the thread can make out what the postee meant without clicking but if they want to put the effort in they can make the effort to open up the full sized image.

Having a row of in thread links might speed up the loading times but it may slow down the flow of appreciation of the ideas presented on the page (an image can sometimes be worth a thousand words and the extra loading time).

Archived images from early on in older posts could also be adjusted to meet the new size limit.

Jay, thanks for confirming that you'll be giving the option of a 'wider' page look in the forum for those that prefer/are still used to that layout.  Options are always welcome.

As far as the 'embedded images' thing....while I agree that needlessly large images are annoying, I also have to strongly agree with Bingowings point that being able to show direct, 'at-a-glance' images is a very welcome and useful function to have in many instances.

I'd be sorry to lose the option to show 'reasonably'-sized photos/screenshots directly in a post, for the very reasons Bingo has said about that.

But I wonder how many posters actually know how to 'shrink' the size of certain images here?  Being the computer-illiterate heathen that I am, it was only last week that I personally discovered how to do this.  ( for those that don't know yet:  say you come across a random image on the net that you want to post - if you right-click on it and then click onto 'Properties' at the bottom of the pull-down menu that appears....as well as seeing the 'image URL' code in the info. that appears, you'll also see the size dimensions of the image too.  So when you go to show the image on the forum, when you click the 'insert/edit image' tree icon at the top of the 'reply' box to enter the 'image URL' code....you can also enter your own size dimensions just underneath....  For instance, if the image seems large to begin with, just enter size dimensions that are HALF or QUARTER of whatever the image size is of the picture you want to show )

Perhaps a 'sticky' with some info. along these lines could be put up?....followed by 'strong encouragement' for offenders to 'quick edit' any extreme examples they post?

Something that does bug me is when someone's 'too-large' image is needless 'quoted' and re-shown again by someone else, just so that they can inanely post something like 'that's cool' underneath it, or something equally trivial. That kind of thing should definately be bitchslapped out of here with a much protest as possible!

Loving the new petition wording by the way.  And the new logo too.  Very 'retro'....and very subtle.

 

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Oh man, I just clicked on the 'insert/edit image' icon to 'embed' a small something....but it seems to be 'disabled' now.

Can you confirm if this is already the case Jay?  Kinda makes my points concerning that a bit of moot point now if so....

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Accidental post. bug to note: post reply can work when there's no text. That's rather annoying.

A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em

Author
Time

Ok where do we sign up for the petition to get this forum back to a wider screen layout???

Or do we need Adywan to fix this also???

Hate the new layout, what the hell was you thinking about to do this????

Everything these days is going wide screen, this is a step backward in my opinion

Might as well get the old 12" green screen monitor out

What a complete idiot!!

Author
Time

Thanks for your input.

 

 

Cock.

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here