What favorite UI element will we lose next? Everything?
-
we should have an extra couple of shortcuts to
collapse a topic to bookmarks only
navigate to next bookmarkthat would improve my usability a billionfold, but simply having an indication in the bookmarks tab as to which bookmarks are topic level and which are post level wuould be a huge win for me, and likely an easier thing to implement.
-
Thats actually quite trivial in a customization, I will add a class for you (may not make the upcoming beta but will make next on after that)
-
A lot of my bookmarks are temporary, so probably don't show up as "heavy use" on a snapshot of who's using what.
-
Current snapshot from the admin dashboard:
I see that as a fairly used feature. 7 bookmarks just today.
-
1 bookmark in every ~22 posts (All time) seems decent too.
-
So we could style them as ...?
-
when you click on the bookmark icon from the topic list it takes you to the first bookmark on the topic
No.When you click on the bookmark icon from the topic list it takes to the first unread post of the bookmarked topic. And there is no such icon for topics with bookmarked posts (unless they are also bookmarked topics, of course).
This isn't rocket surgery.
That said it is really really rare for someone to be using bookmarks heavily, in the vast majority of cases people only bookmark 1 post in a topic.
This is definitely not my case, but I'm sure you have some collected data to support this claim.Thats actually quite trivial in a customization, I will add a class for you (may not make the upcoming beta but will make next on after that)
Thank you.
-
That said it is really really rare for someone to be using bookmarks heavily, in the vast majority of cases people only bookmark 1 post in a topic.
How the fuck do you know?
Do you guys have actual instrumentation, or are you just going by what the 1/10000th of your user population visits the meta forum?
Or more likely you just read some article on Smashing Magazine. EDIT: or even more likely, Atwood pulled it out of his ass and declared it a "fact".
EDIT EDIT: Of course you've also created this stupid ridiculously broken and confusing UI for bookmarks, so even if your little statistic there is true, you have no idea if it's "cause" or "effect" of the current UI. Maybe people only bookmark once per thread because your confusing UI leads them to think that's all they can do.
-
this means there's new energy directed at removing features. Probably stuff that you (OK, I) like.
Does anybody like the fucking toasters?
-
I don't mind them. I think the necro-toaster is useful.
I even tolerate the shut-up-and-let-others-talk toaster.
-
I think the necro-toaster is useful.
My main objection to the necro-toaster is that I only ever see it when responding to a thread that Suggested Topics has brought to my attention. If the Forum Gods don't want me saying things, why deliberately present me with stuff to say things about?
the shut-up-and-let-others-talk toaster
It's a forum with writing on, not a speakerphone conference. Letting others talk does not require shutting up. The only reason the shut-up toaster exists at all is because of Dicksauce's dogmatic adherence to an almost but not quite threaded conversation model.
-
-
```css
.composer-popup.urgent {
display: none !important;
}\*steals*
-
NB - barely tested.
It does fit the Jeffilosophy of "you can fix it with CSS" though.
-
Just sayin'.
@pjh done tole me there warnt nothin he cud do bout them toasters. You callin @pjh a damn liar?
-
-
Not like I don't use poorly-tested software every day
-
@pjh done tole me there warnt nothin he cud do bout them toasters. You callin @pjh a damn liar?
Well I suppose I could reset the necro-toaster back to its default - the joke's probably run its time by now...
[pjh@sofa discourse]$ SUBJECT="%reviving%" sql_tdwtf changes # List changes in the history log from user_histories uh join users u on u.id=acting_user_id where subject ilike '%reviving%' order by uh.updated_at asc subject | updated_at | username | previous_value | new_value -----------------------------+----------------------------+----------+----------------+----------- warn_reviving_old_topic_age | 2014-08-22 12:16:26.439503 | PJH | 180 | 14 warn_reviving_old_topic_age | 2014-08-22 12:16:33.12913 | PJH | 14 | 7 warn_reviving_old_topic_age | 2014-11-14 09:14:47.289533 | PJH | 7 | 180 warn_reviving_old_topic_age | 2014-11-14 09:14:50.657683 | PJH | 180 | 7 (4 rows) Elapsed: 0.015s Backup taken: 2015-05-04 03:29:46.923632 [pjh@sofa discourse]$
-
If only you could keep the 7-day limit for One Post and nothing else ...
-
That would be a bit pointless wouldn't it?...
-
discoursistent to be sure. ;-)
-
Not for TL4s who are catching up on less than a month old topics ...
-
I objected at the time about the whole thing, as I did actually use stars, but I've missed being able to star a topic approximately 0 times.
I've missed being able to star a topic 1 or 2 times. I've missed having starred topics about 3 or 4 times a day. Having stars and bookmarks conflated makes the bookmarks UIs a little confusing. You want to go to a bookmarked topic? Use the bookmark topic filter. Want a bookmarked post? Use the list in your profile.
My biggest problem with it lately has been that the topics I want to bookmark/star end up cluttering the post UI list. I end up needing to sort through the posts that are bookmarked in order to keep track of a topic in order to find a post that is bookmarked for itself.
-
I must have missed those…
Jeff's publicly visible comment was something along the lines of " uck stars in their little star holes".
-
d by five hours
-
Well it's their problem if some prospective customers decides to peek at their log, sees this and decides to take business elsewhere. What do we care?
-
I've missed being able to start a topic 1 or 2 times
On the next episode of Jeff's Adventures with UI - Jeff removes the New Topic button.
Topics are too much information.
-
I need my sleep, dammit!
-
On the next episode of Jeff's Adventures with UI - Jeff removes the New Topic button.
Topics are too much information.
Though strangely, I wouldn't be entirely surprised.
-
I think closed topics need a warning "Note: You are posting to a closed topic. Although you can post here, unprivileged users cannot. Are you sure you want to proceed?"
-
Sounds like a good first topic for you to create at meta.d.
-
So another Discotoaster for us to ignore?
-
Jeff's publicly visible comment was something along the lines of " uck stars in their little star holes".
I see no mention to acebook in his commit message.
-
-
If that is how you roll :)
-
And for the other half of the equation, I guess we can JS in a filter on the bookmarks page.
-
Op. Op. Op, op, op. Op-bookmark style?
-
-
Though strangely, I wouldn't be entirely surprised.
Wrong. Obviously a topic should be short and concise, and all unrelated discussion should be branched out by "Reply as new topic" functionality.
Therefore, the most obvious UI element to go is the "Reply" button.
-
Therefore, the most obvious UI element to go is the "Reply" button.
Disagree. Discourse is forum software, not chat software. Therefore, users should carefully proofread what they write and include all necessary information before posting anything. Further, the availability of the preview window - which always matches the baked posts - permits a user to see how their post will look once submitted. With this in mind, it is obvious that the ability to edit posts should be removed before any other feature pruning is done.
-
Ah, but, you couldn't be more wrong, my dear friend. For you see, editing is a minor feature - and as everyone conforming to the Jeff's Design Philosophy knows, minor features shall be cared upon, carefully tweaked and treated with attention to every detail. Major features, such as replying or creating threads, are for the losers who can't possibly comprehend the amount of complexity in Discourse.
With all that in mind, you can clearly see how much room for improvement is there in the edit feature. Heated discussions on whether the pencil glyph should be facing left or right, or whether the edit indicator should be coldmapped to the last recent edit, are yet to be had - so clearly removing that feature outright would hinder the possibilities of progress and changes that truly make Discourse the forum software of ten years from now.
On the contrary, features like replying to posts are an artifact of the old and rusty forums of the past. Discourse is not the software that would just stay on the beaten path - it's its own giant lending itself the shoulders to stand on. Such legacy needs to be eliminated sharply and swiftly.
-
For you see, editing is a minor feature - and as everyone conforming to the Jeff's Design Philosophy knows, minor features shall be cared upon, carefully tweaked and treated with attention to every detail.
Good point. I did overlook that.
I've got it: eliminate avatars! After all, how do avatars contribute to meaningful, civilized discourse? They are unnecessary for user recognition, that's what user names are for. All they stand to do is push everything in post area over by a fixed amount. We end up with this ugly hanging white space below them!
And why to we have avatars? Simply because other forum platforms do, nothing more! It is a vestigial appendage, and one that we would do well to eliminate!
-
We end up with this ugly hanging white space below them!
I thought we were for whitespace these days.
-
I thought we were for whitespace these days.
You aren't being discoursistent enough!
-
I've got it: eliminate avatars! After all, how do avatars contribute to meaningful, civilized discourse? They are unnecessary for user recognition, that's what user names are for.
No, no, no, everything possible should be communicated by icons, glyphs, pictures and LOLcats. Not to mention the lack of whitespace, this just can't be.
What should be eliminated are usernames. After all, an avatar is just as good an identity token, and we'd at least get rid of that pesky validation and @mention hacks.
-
everything possible should be communicated by icons, glyphs, pictures and LOLcats.
Alphabets are a barrier to discourse.
-
No, no, no, everything possible should be communicated by icons, glyphs, pictures and LOLcats. Not to mention the lack of whitespace, this just can't be.
What should be eliminated are usernames. After all, an avatar is just as good an identity token, and we'd at least get rid of that pesky validation and @mention hacks
Following that line of thought, the following steps should be taken:
- Remove the ability to customize the minimum character post length.
- Over time, gradually increase the minimum characters post length. This force users to express their thoughts and opinions more explicitly, leading to less miscommunication. This is civilized Discourse.
- This will have the added benefit of weeding out trouble users who can't be bothered to sufficiently describe their thoughts and ideas. Further, posts with minimal redeeming value will be prevented.
- Eventually, the minimum post length will exceed the maximum post length. Posting will become impossible, and users have to learn to communicate telepathically. Mind-to-mind communication will prevent any possibility of miscommunication or deception.
- Civilized discourse will be perfected!
-
I want to quote a respected member of our comunity when I asked:
WHERE IS GRUMPY CAT?Filed Under: How would you reply to a post with a lolcat if the postlength is being increased?
-
Filed Under: How would you reply to a post with a lolcat if the postlength is being increased?
Exactly! Civilized discourse consists of expressing your thoughts concisely and in the simplest possible manner. Ergo, it's the maximum length that should be gradually decreased, until it reaches the lowest possible value of zero, at which point the most civilized kind of discourse can take place, with no flaming, baiting or other signs of uncivilized behavior.
-
I second the removal of avatars. Names are enough.
Also, in order to make the interface less busy (reading is essential!) I propose that all elements except for post content (including quotes) become faded out and only revealed on mouseover longer than 5 seconds, or a vigorous shake of your mobile device.