Forum Changes - Page 7

Gandalf Parker · #61 March 6th, 2005, 12:03 AM

Quote:

CovertJaguar said:
Since you asked Combat Wombat, here you go.

So you are going to post it in their forum how to block out their changes? Ever hear the term "escalation"? You will probably wish you had accepted the first effort. For that matter if everyone hadnt griped about the OT thing you might have avoided this. But go ahead and continue making it worse.

Cant wait to see what they do about the rule #5 violations filling the database just for a post count.

Gandalf Parker · #62 March 6th, 2005, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Suicide Junkie said:
At the moment, the top-bar banner appears to link to random games. Since it appears to be 100% shrapnel stuff, why not cycle the news there...
Especially if you code things with a coloured border; new games could be green, game status changes (backorder, etc) could be blue. Major new mods (I see there are some for dom2) could be in yellow. Red could be for critical global news, such as the forum move, or an important staffing change.

Hmmm not a bad suggestion. I thought at first they were trying to keep the same little squares they used on the first page to avoid having to make 2 such squares for each news piece. But since they are playing with backgrounds I guess not.

CovertJaguar · #63 March 6th, 2005, 12:12 AM

What? First effort? I only posted them because Combat Wombat asked for them. The only reason it broke before is because the filters were poorly made and the change in size of the sidebar messed them up. If shrapnel asks me to stop I will. Additionally, I will only post the filters if someone asks for them.

And what do you mean by the "OT thing"?

Baron Munchausen · #64 March 6th, 2005, 12:29 AM

I agree that the banner sidebar would be less of a problem if it did not appear in the message threads. Once you have read the notices while viewing the topic list, that's enough. However, I also am a Proxomitron user and it took me about 1 minute to whip up an effective filter for myself.

Gandalf Parker · #65 March 6th, 2005, 12:32 AM

Quote:

CovertJaguar said:
And what do you mean by the "OT thing"?

It was suggested that maybe the wildly OT posts that created long flamewars should be in Shrapnel General which was made for it. Response along the line of "our little community" and "we come straight here and dont see other forums or the main pages". Response along the line of "that might not be a good thing to declare" and "in other forums that has led to" followed by a description of different things including what we are seeing now.

Suicide Junkie · #66 March 6th, 2005, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Gandalf Parker said:
It was suggested that maybe the wildly OT posts that created long flamewars should be in Shrapnel General which was made for it.

There are no flamewars here in the SE4 section of the forums, "despite" the ample quantity of OT threads.

I must admit I have never seen any serious flamewars as rumours have them. But ISTM that that would increase my perception of any flaming at all.

Gandalf Parker · #67 March 6th, 2005, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Suicide Junkie said:

Quote:

Gandalf Parker said:
It was suggested that maybe the wildly OT posts that created long flamewars should be in Shrapnel General which was made for it.

There are no flamewars here in the SE4 section of the forums, "despite" the ample quantity of OT threads.

OK no flame wars. The "exubrant discussions on touchy subjects" which were different than the "helpful game support" of the forum.

Jack Simth · #68 March 6th, 2005, 12:47 AM

Meh. Any change takes some getting used to. It works. It didn't break the forum view I usually use. I can run with it.

Combat Wombat · #69 March 6th, 2005, 12:48 AM

If it wasn't for those posts I wouldn't be involded in any shrapnel stuff, I would have never purchased starfury and would probaly not have purchased SE5 when it comes out.

Gandalf Parker · #70 March 6th, 2005, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Combat Wombat said:
If it wasn't for those posts I wouldn't be involded in any shrapnel stuff, I would have never purchased starfury and would probaly not have purchased SE5 when it comes out.

Those were never the posts refered to. There was never an effort to kill all OT posts. Ones about PCs, or other games, or star wars, or start trek, or a hundred other "grey" subjects. It was only suggested that maybe the religious, or about the war, or other obviously meant to spark heated discussions would be better in the forum described as being for that purpose rather than the SEIV one.

But the same point. The "we never see those because we come straight here" was not a good response to make.