JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

#Community

10/27/2012 8:02:16 AM
79

More focus on posts and less on the people who make them

In Bungie.next, there should be a change in the way the forums display topics and posts. Namely, modifying the view of topics and forums to focus more on the content that's being created (topics and posts) and less on the authors. To start off, take a look at any forum page. Now look at any individual entry for a topic. You have eight elements: - Status (the icon adjacent to the topic) - Title - Reply counter - Author - Date posted - Who replied last - Date of the last reply - Pager links ("[Pages: 1 2 .. 7 8]" portion) In my opinion, the bare minimum for a useful topic display (just from those above) would include the title, date posted, and reply count. The others are kind of iffy, so I'm going to explain why I do/do not think each of these elements are or are not important. [b]Status[/b][quote]Other than being another place to click on to access the topic (and that's even a bit misleading on topics without an icon), these have no other use. As far as what they indicate, only locked topics have (and should - more on this later) have any useful indicator to them. - The [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconNew.gif]new posts[/url] (ie. those with less than 51 replies [i]and[/i] have a post within the last 30 minutes) icon is somewhat flawed and redundant. Firstly, "Hot topics" (and others) override this, so even if a topic has new posts this doesn't show up. Secondly, the constraint on having a post within the last 30 minutes is redundant because the forum is sorted chronologically by the last post date - I can look at the reply count and the date instead (in fact I can then apply my own idea of what constitutes a topic with "new posts"). - I think the idea of [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconHot.gif]hot topics[/url] is to give a kind of indicator as for whether or not a topic is popular and you should probably check it out (that's the way it seems, anyway). Unfortunately I don't think this is a good measure of whether the topic is actually worth reading or not, and is really just a quick indicator for whether a topic has more than 50 replies (again, something I cannot customise - why does/should it take 51 replies for a "hot" topic?). - [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconBungie.gif]Employee[/url] and [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconLocked.gif]locked[/url] topics fall into a single category - those which have some kind of administrative functionality; "this is an [important] announcement" and "this is a topic which you shouldn't create", respectively. I really don't think these need something as big as an icon. A small tag included alongside/adjacent to the topic (a la Reddit's admin/NSFW tags) would be sufficient IMO. [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconPinned.gif]Pinned[/url] and [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconPinLocked.gif]Pinned and locked[/url] icons are redundant since they both appear in the pinned topics section. Pinned and locked topics could easily have the "locked tag" applied as well. - [url=http://www.bungie.net/images/base_struct_images/forums/IconArchived.gif]Archived topics[/url] could probably have the same kind of tag applied, but I don't really have an opinion on them since I don't think topics should be archived at all.[/quote] [b]Title[/b][quote]Obviously keep this, but make two changes: 1) Allow other character sets to be input; and 2) Keep a character limit, increase it, but don't truncate the string. Wrap it around to a new line. Possibly make the font larger too.[/quote] [b]Reply counter[/b][quote]As odd as it might sound, I think this can contribute to determining whether the topic is worth clicking on (plus, it's always an interesting statistic). Definitely keep this, but maybe move it from the line where the title is displayed and/or decrease the font size.[/quote] [b]Author[/b][quote]While I can't exactly explain why, I think it is useful to see who has posted a topic from the forum page.[/quote] [b]Date posted[/b][quote]Again, I have no justification for keeping this here other than it being useful information. However, [i][b]PLEASE CHANGE IT TO RELATIVE TIME![/b][/i] A rollover which displays the full [i]local[/i] date and time would be brilliant too.[/quote] [b]Who replied last[/b][quote]This I do not feel is useful enough to warrant it existing on the forum page. That is to say, in the context of viewing the forums to look for topics, whoever posted last is irrelevant.[/quote] [b]Date of the last reply[/b][quote]Considering that the forum is sorted chronologically by default, this isn't really all that useful (especially when I can just go into the topic and look at the last reply). The only time this might be useful is if you could sort the forums by different criteria (eg. reply count, etc...). If it were kept, do the same with the date posted and change it to relative time and include a local timestamp on rollover.[/quote] [b]Pager links[/b][quote]I've honestly never used them because I don't find them all that useful. I wouldn't miss them if they disappeared.[/quote] Hopefully that explains some of my justifications for wanting the forum topics to change. Now onto posts within topics. Each post has five elements at the highest level. An avatar, titlebar, the post itself, reply/edit/report/etc... buttons, and a timestamp. I want to expand on the titlebar only though because its sub-elements are displayed as well. So we end up with: - Avatar - Username - Title - Message user link - Groups link - More/Signature arrow - Post - Post buttons - Timestamp Once again, the bare minimum would only include the username, post, post buttons, and timestamp. Here's why: [b]Avatar[/b][quote]Sorry to disappoint, but as far as what people should be focusing on within the topic, it shouldn't be the avatar. It is too prominent and takes up too much space when it is alongside a post. Given the [current] size of the area where posts are displayed, having the avatar there takes up about a fifth of the total space. I think it should be removed completely, shrunk considerably (eg. 45x45, 32x32), moved above/below the post, or added dynamically/on-demand as a panel that appears when rolling over the username.[/quote] [b]Username[/b][quote]Yes, keep this. Although what if its position were changed? Beside/below the post contents?[/quote] [b]Title[/b][quote]Except for administrative titles (Employee, Ninja, etc...) and perhaps an indicator for who the OP is (a nice little addition IMO) titles are kind of silly and a waste of space here. I don't really care if they continue to exist, but I don't like the fact they exist in a context where they have little meaning and are bigger than the actual post text. Having them in the panel I was talking about might look nice, and would be appropriate if I cared to learn more about a specific user.[/quote] [b]Message user link[/b][quote]Very rarely will I use this since I can click someone's profile then hit send message. In that respect it's redundant (and it seems more intuitive to initiate sending a PM from a profile page anyway).[/quote] [b]Groups link[/b][quote]Same as the above.[/quote] [b]More/Signature arrow[/b][quote]While the contents of the box that appears as a result of clicking the arrow isn't shown by default, the contents of this box are redundant since I can click a user's profile and get the same information. Again, this information might be more appropriate if displayed in a dynamically added rollover box.[/quote] [b]Post[/b][quote]No changes.[/quote] [b]Post buttons[/b][quote]I don't really see any other way these could be displayed. Although, what if these were fixed to the browser window while scrolling through a long post?[/quote] [b]Timestamp[/b][quote]Obviously this should stay, but with a few changes: 1) Inclusion of relative time (eg. "10 minutes ago", "3 months ago", "4 years ago", etc...). 2) Inclusion of an English-like timestamp. That means a timestamp like "Today at 5:01 PM", "Yesterday at 11:35 AM", for any recent timestamps instead of what we currently have "10.01.2012 11:17 PM PDT", because if I look at that on its own I don't know whether it's the 10th of January or the 1st of October. Older timestamps should have something like "Wed Oct 17 2012 at 2:44 PM". Structuring and displaying a timestamp in this way is readable by everyone, regardless of their locale. 3) [b][i]LOCAL TIMESTAMPS![/i][/b] Or at the very least set to UTC. This is VERY important.[/quote] That's pretty much it I think. Most of the functional things I'd like to have I've talked about in other topics, and the only other time I've given my opinion on the layout of the site was in regard to the Reach game pages, but never the forums. Anyway, hopefully the Web Team finds this and whatever arises in the ensuing discussion useful for Bungie.next.

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

View Entire Topic
  • [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CrazzySnipe55 [i]On community identities...[/i][/quote]A couple of things to say about this. 1) You made a comparison to 4chan on the basis of anonymity, then redacted the comment while acknowledging that's not what I stated the site should act like. 2) Look at how the forum on a site like Reddit is structured. It has even less elements to each post that what I'm suggesting, yet identities aren't lost; it's still a "community" (search on Google for how Reddit users have even had get-togethers and meetups not unlike Bungie.net's community). This kind of interaction and sense of community isn't limited to Reddit, either. Other sites with limited "identities" (and all I'm referring to is the forum!) still have users who recognise each other. Hell, look at how Usenet worked in its heyday and there's an extremely good example of a kind of community with [i]extremely[/i] limited identities (just usernames and email addresses mostly). Slashdot is another good example, IMO (take a look at how user information is represented on comments). Edit: one of the other reasons you probably get a greater sense of "the community" here is because this forum is generally used by the same people. So I don't think this is something that is appropriate to claim when you consider the entire population of the site. That last point I think is especially relevant in times of high traffic. This forum for as long as I can remember has generally had the same amount of traffic. The same cannot be said for others like the game forums. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CrazzySnipe55 [quote]Why do people need such an overbearing and prominent "identity" in the forums?[/quote]The system you're proposing has in it next to no identity at all, so to call the current system one where a given user has "an overbearing and prominent 'identity'", is a little silly. Coup is more of an example of an overbearing and prominent identity.[/quote]Actually I was talking about the current setup and why you seem to think we need what I referred to as an "overbearing and prominent identity", not what I'm suggesting. I was merely asking you why our so-called identities need to be displayed the way they are and not in a different/reduced way or prominence. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CrazzySnipe55 [quote] So others can see they belong to some kind of group/clique?[/quote]If this is an attempt to associate the displaying of title bars with the idea of "I'm a ______ member so I'm cool" or something like that, then that's not what I'm getting at at all. If it's more of a sincere question of whether or not people want to appear as if they belong to a group, even if that group is as vaguely defined as "People who regular Bungie.net", then yes. I think that definitely is something people want. And the more identified and the more they stand out from the two users above and below them, the more they can identify as a person within a community rather than a user within a website.[/quote]I agree. I don't particularly have a problem with identifying users - or giving them an identity for that matter - what I do find to be a problem is giving the details of those identities in places where they aren't so relevant or necessary (at least in place of other features or in such a way that they negatively impact the necessary elements within a certain context). In this particular discussion we're having, I'm only interested in talking about the identities [i]as they are displayed in the forums[/i]. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CrazzySnipe55 [quote]Secondly, why isn't the contents of my signature displayed at the bottom of each of my posts? Should it?[/quote]Signatures, while an even further extension of the identification and differentiation between User A and User B, are easily abused and often not utilized the way they're meant to. They're a signature, a way to sign your post. Not a place to post your favorite quote or advertise your off-site Forge Forum or YouTube channel, and they're too commonly misused to warrant their utilization. If you want to sign your post, sign it. Manually. With whatever moniker you wish to give yourself. People like yorkie, Delta, TGP, and (from what I gather) BB have proven that if you do this manually it helps loads more with creating an identity than does a signature full of your Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Myspace, Tumblr, Flickr, Blogger, Digg, and YouTube information.[/quote]Firstly, who are you to tell someone what they should or shouldn't be putting in there or what's acceptable or not? Where's the sense of identification, personalisation, and individuality which you've been championing if I'm restricted to posting an actual signature? Where's the "fun" in that, as you were referring to such features earlier? Restricting this doesn't seem all that different from removing some other element in a forum post which might help uniquely identify a user, like an avatar or title. For the record, it's actually labelled an "About Me" section, too. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Xplode441 Supports friends list, but doesn't want people to know who anyone is so they can make friends.[/quote]In case someone misses it in the pool of text above, I'm only referring to removing some of the identifying features associated with a user in the forums and in a forum post, potentially for enhancing the readability and usability of the forums themselves and to make way (and room!) for other features to be included. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Iggyhopper[/quote]The wording on this part was a little off on my part, sorry. The last post date should be kept, but changed to relative time instead. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Pulse Cloud Although I agree that avatars are worthless, they serve a very practical purpose to me: I use them to separate posts. Entire walls of text are very difficult to skim through, so having a colorful, variable picture separating each post is a very easy way for my eyes to figure out the layout of the page even while scrolling.[/quote]This was something I was hoping someone was going to bring up at some point because yes, I absolutely agree that avatars separate posts nicely. However, could it be done in a different/better way that leaves more room for post contents? [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Pulse Cloud This is also why I think pushing the user's metadata to the bottom of his post, especially the avatar, would make it harder to comprehend how posts are laid out (there's a reason why titles are always above the text body).[/quote]If user data is at the bottom of posts, it's still going to act as a separator for them. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Pulse Cloud Finally, I like how small the post area's length is: 300+ characters lines are impossible to read, whereas 80-100 are fairly easy. About 60 would be ideal for me, though.[/quote]I disagree. I think this is one of the reasons (aka. problems) we have such massive walls of text here; there simply isn't enough room for posts. Dynamically expanding posts would obviously work pretty well for this, but I've never really been a fan of them (or that kind of page presentation). [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Xd00999 For starters, I browse B.net on mobile, so a scroll over box wouldn't work for me.[/quote]The main site is not formatted for mobile devices. This is not a good argument. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Xd00999 Secondly, avatars and titles are what I use to identify members.[/quote]Apart from administrative titles, what purpose does a title serve in a discussion? How is it relevant to the discussion? [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Xd00999 I also disagree with the idea of removing the last post date and user. Sometimes I looked at a thread that I was only mildly interested in because a user I recognized was posting there and I was curious about what they are up to. If I was in a discussion, I also look to see if the user I was talking to had psted, so I could check for a reply.[/quote]I contend that this is the kind of functionality you would want from a friends list (and would be more appropriately placed there), not by the default forum view. [Edited on 10.30.2012 7:44 PM PDT]

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon