RE: Frontpage/UI Improvements?
by reptile (Monk) on Jul 27, 2000 at 21:45 UTC
|
Just to throw out an idea, perhaps letting the moderators write a short summary of the question (and others) when they approve it for the front page, and displaying that with a read more link. It wouldn't be so good if the question or discussion etc. aren't clear enough to summarize, but the unclear ones don't really deserve the front page anyway, do they?
I think there should be anchors on the front page too with links at the top somewhere to the different sections of the front page. Or perhaps redesign the front page to be more, um, slashdot-like so instead of different sections show them all mixed together, newest first, with the section displayed clearly on each entry. Just a few ideas of course. Feel free to disagree.
local $_ = "0A72656B636148206C72655020726568746F6E41207473754A";
while(s/..$//) { print chr(hex($&)) }
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] [d/l] |
|
Just to throw out an idea, perhaps letting the moderators write a short summary of the question (and others) when they approve it for the front page, and displaying that with a read more link. It wouldn't be so good if the question or discussion etc. aren't clear enough to summarize, but the unclear ones don't really deserve the front page anyway, do they?
reptile, in principle, this is a good idea. However, it's my experience that we the moderators don't go through the un-approved entries as often as we should. I try to make a pass through at least once a day, preferrably twice. The problem is that when working from the Newest Nodes page, you don't know there are un-approved entries present. One must go to the actual section, and scroll to the bottom to find them. As such, adding additional overhead to the process of approval is likely to cause them to get them done less often.
I like the idea, but unless the approval process is re-vamped, I don't think it's going to integrate well.
--Chris
e-mail jcwren
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
|
I'm as guilty as the next at not checking for unapproved message, and it'd take an armed holdup to convince me use the Gates instead of Newest Nodes. But perhaps NN could include the approval information as well, say by appending (unapproved) to the title. It would also help to have the ok and frontpage boxes on the node itself, though I suspect this would take a tad more work.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] [d/l] |
|
As pointed out this can become quite a task, my idea
is simple, the poster make a short summary of the topic,
question,whatever, no more than $n lines, and this summary if approved can
then be posted in the frontpage, the pluses are, 1.) the monk will,
or should think hard before posting. 2.) the load for the moderators
is less. 3.) we can decide if we want to look at it.
Of course this has disadvantages, but it's just an idea.
monk
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
Simplify Frontpage
by gryng (Hermit) on Jul 27, 2000 at 21:02 UTC
|
Why not just make the front page not include the body of any of the nodes shown, rather just the titles?
It's simple, clean, and I'm not sure why you would want to see that many nodes at once anyway.
My 1.83^(pi/e) cents,
Gryn | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
|
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
(kudra: break automatically, or (better) no posts on front page) RE: Frontpage/UI Improvements?
by kudra (Vicar) on Jul 28, 2000 at 11:38 UTC
|
If samples of each section remain on the first
page, I think that in most cases, breaking
automagically at the first <p> or the
first <code> would work (for the long-winded,
a maximum character limit might be needed). If someone
can't describe what's going on in the first paragraph
(with supporting evidence and examples to follow), what
hope is there that the rest of the message will get to
the point?
This applies more to questions and discussions than
replies, of course, because a reply must first address
what was said before getting--in the case of this post,
in paragraph three--to the substance.
Examples of each section are wasted on the front page
because it:
- creates the expectation in new users
that that is the appropriate place to look for their
posted question, and
- is not used to the extent that Newest Nodes
is by regular users (see
the source of unsubstantiated evidence).
Does any frequent user actually
look at the front page for
anything other than quest announcements?
Given that the people most likely to view the front
page are new users, it seems an ideal place to shove
site how-to information. An example, freely stolen
from Where should I post X?:
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
When you need an answer to an actual real
life problem fast you're probably going
to want to post your question here.
Categorized Questions and Answers
These are more general questions. If you
post a question to Seekers of Perl Wisdom
but think other people
might benefit from the knowledge you might
want to rephrase it in more general terms
for this section. This is also a good place
to look for answers
before you post to Seekers of Perl Wisdom
And so on.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
|
If that's done, the titles of the last few approved posts could be listed with the number of top-level replies. That would solve a couple of issues.
First, it does as kudra implies, and immediately imparts good usage information into the minds of new users.
Second, it guarantees the page size for The Monastery Gates will be kept low -- both in file size and in scrolling size.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
(jcwren) RE: Frontpage/UI Improvements?
by jcwren (Prior) on Jul 27, 2000 at 21:06 UTC
|
I like the ability to touch up the Subjects, but I'm not sure I like how's it being used. For example (and not just to pick on gryng), I don't care for the way the subject was changed to the follow up to your initial post. It's not clear in the Notes and Replies section where it belongs. Whereas when the threads all have the same subject, I can safely ignore the whole brouhaha about Camel 3.
Update to gryngs reply below: I'm certainly not advocating 12 RE:s strung out on a row, either. I'm sort of fond of the RE: (4), to indicate it's a 5th level posting (the very first being 1, without a RE:).
--Chris
e-mail jcwren | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
|
No 'picked on'-ness taken jcwren. I change the subject because RE:'s make me nauseous. As for making where my post is comming from clear, I suggested something earlier: For Newest nodes (or where ever), order newest nodes by the root node that they are a child of. Also group them up so that you have the root node's title at the top of a little section and all the new nodes it has under it, something like:
Camel 3 Protest:
RE: Camel 3 Protest
Changing the subject...
It Rules!
UI Improvements:
Simplify it!
RE: UI Improvements
...etc...
You could even indent the new nodes by the distance to the parent node, if you really want to (though I do not feel the need to include the option of showing all the nodes between the parent node and the new node!).
Anyway I'm going to keep changing the subject when I can remember, cause it's what I like to do (no disrespect to jcwren and the majority like him), but I do hope that the Newest Nodes section would have that option I just described above -- because I have the same problem with posts that don't have RE:'s. I just would rather kill RE:'s and live with having to figure out where a post came from :) .
Ciao!
Gryn | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] [d/l] |
|
While the "RE: " x $n form is quite hideous. I mainly don't like the idea of RE: in general, I would rather people put more thought into their posts.
My belief is that if you take the time to make a subject line to your post thoughtful, your post will be more thoughtful too.
That's why in my original post (the one before the one before ..pause.. right!), I suggested removal of a default subject line, and the requirement of a non-blank subject line before you are allowed to post (perhaps even a minimum char limit of 4-5 to keep people from hitting space)
Cheers,
Gryn
p.s. but simplly getting rid of your "RE: " x $n syndrome would make me significantly happier. I just don't think that will solve all problems beyond eye-happiness. :)
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
RE: Frontpage/UI Improvements?
by nivlac (Scribe) on Jul 28, 2000 at 17:17 UTC
|
Instead of having only one text area for each post have two.
The second area would be used strictly for the referenced code.
Then next to each post, if code has been included, place a link
to the full atricle including the code. This way the poster's full
question can be read, and monks can determine for themselves if they
wish to read the code or not. | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
RE: Frontpage/UI Improvements?
by ArthurDent (Acolyte) on Jul 28, 2000 at 17:58 UTC
|
One thing to do IMHO is take any long code snippets and not
show them on the main page. Sure it might make navigating
a bit more difficult, but you only have to see the code
that you're interested in rather than all of it.
Maybe any code segment over 5-10 lines is not included on
the front page but if the user is interested they can go to
the full node?
Just a thought
One other thing: I hate having to put html BR commands in
my posts to put whitespace in them. Is there a way around
that? Sorry for going offtopic.
Ben | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
|
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |