Ok..

Love the site...


However...I have some questions...

first of is this...you have the best group off of any posters from any board...

but you couldnt spread your shit out more... I get what youre thinking...and I used to think how you thought.... "lets make a forum for everything"

I would put my dick on it that you shit would be better, more organized and make people post more if there were two forums...

A) SPORTS
B) off topic


YOU HAVE SO MANY FORUMS I get confused, and I have been here how long...why come here?

jesus, this site has the best base in the city, yet its set up like the Dallas Mavericks...

Guys, think about it...look who posts...look where people post... you get two forums...stickey the two important threads and you get more people participating in more fourms...and you make your place a forum where people will stay..

Just saying...from a guy that wants to post here...and knows you confuse the shit out of everyoen that tries...

but teh idiot fest will b 2 much!

not inferring that you are, but I think you know what I mean. Also, I am much more happy with forums that are spread out like they are. I know we have been over this before...

As far as I'm concerned, it's going to be out of whack either way. If there's a sports forum, I'm going to have to weave my way thru the threads to find what I'm looking for.

I could live either way, however.

I think the amount of forums is fine, but I don't like the subforums. We have too many subforums. Those are what gets confusing, and even makes the site look cluttered. Old Subforums should go in the Stands.

I like the forums the way they're set up but so often a lot of sub-forums overlap and you can have very similar discussions spanning 4 or 5 different sub-forums. To talk about the Pistons this summer we have the offseason thread, the new coach thread, more than one draft thread and various trade threads, with each separate thread sometimes having something to do with another (trading for a pick to draft...). Could the whole Reverend Wright issue be discussed entirely within the Democratic race thread (where it was discussed quite a bit) or did it need its own thread? I don't have the answer to that question but I think it's the overlap that may lead to the confusion and/or unwillingness to post.

It bothers me that some of the sub forums don't make the front page. it's an extra click to check new messages.

I like our forum setup. I do agree some of the subforums could be eliminated. Like why do we have a fun with trade ideas forum when we talk about the offseason in the NBA forum? We'll have to discuss this and maybe there are some that can be cleaned up.

The problem with cutting down to just a few forums is that our volume is pretty high and you could have a lot of posts getting lost on the 2nd+ pages. I check the forums pretty often (every few hours), but someone that only comes here once a day or less would miss out on half the posts.

Like why do we have a fun with trade ideas forum when we talk about the offseason in the NBA forum?

I always thought of that distinction as being fantasy vs. reality.

The made up trades go one place (Fun with trade ideas) because some people don't like weeding through make-believe land to get to the factual stuff (like "legit" rumors and news) which is in the main NBA forum.

I'm trying to stay out of this discussion and just read and observe as much as I can.

Always open to good suggestions, as I'm sure the rest of the admins here are.

True. especially this time of year when we have a zillion trade ideas.

I hate the subforums. Love the rest of the setup though.

Not crazy about subforums, but don't care that much either way.

I started the Rev Wright thread for a good reason. It wasn't about the Dem race anymore. If someone didn't like it, all they had to do was communicate and we could have switched back.

It's cool Tahoe, I was just using it as one of the examples where maybe things overlap and maybe that's how some people get confused.

Save the dropping the gloves for Ott and Orpik :).

2 minutes for roughing on Tahoe.

2 minutes for roughing on Tahoe.
There goes the Lady Byng.

I also dislike the subforums... There's just no need and they make it cluttered. How many people who are interested in reading playoff threads from 2006 don't know how to use the search function? The only one that makes sense to me is the fun with trade ideas subforum, and that is all.

http://www.wtfdetroit.com/forums/search.php?do=getnew

Works for me.

forum organization has always been a tricky balance. too many subforums and the content gets diluted. too few subforums and everything's a mess. we definitely appreciate the feedback and suggestions, guys.

Subforums irritate me. I wish I could configure what forums/subforums I wanted to pay attention to and have all the other forums disappear from view pretty much permanently.

For that matter, I wish I could do the same thing with threads. There's some threads in a given forum that I have zero interest in. Let me remove them from my site.

I've never payed attention to any of it. I just hit "new posts".

too many mofkn subforums imo

And why does the NCAA forum have its own Stands?

This is definitely one of the more well-organized, well-modded sites IMO.

I like the playoff subforums. Having that consolidated by season is kind of cool. The rest of the subforums I think serve more to obscure than organize.

The number of top-level forums is kind of self-regulating and most of them are well justified based on the volume of posts they get. If they're extraneous then nobody will use them. By that measure, the terror dome and motor city style seem to nominate themselves for pruning. The former could fold into the stands and the latter would probably get more action as a stickied thread in off-topic.


I've never payed attention to any of it. I just hit "new posts".

Heh, that's useful. Somehow I never noticed it was there.

I only use the "new posts" button really. I just wish the new posts button was at the bottom of the page as well (I suppose the whole header maybe). It would really speed up browsing if you didn't have to scroll to the top after checking out each post.

As someone that rarely makes it to the NBA forum, because there is just way too much going on there, I like the fact that I can hop on, see if there are any new posts in the NCAA forum, consider some other forums as well, then move along. Part of what keeps me here is that I can be very time efficient.

When this board takes up too much time, that's when I have to cut myself off - and having all sports in the same forum and having to sort through several pages of new posts to see if one interests me would absolutely mean I was done with the site more often than not.

http://991.com/newGallery/Kylie-Minogue-Wouldnt-Change-A-26666.jpg

I think Ray's sig should have it's own sub-forum.
http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa95/Soadium20/1186111056893gz9.gif

Agreed.

I think I stare at that thing at least twice a day.

This site would get way more input from way more people...if it were set up at least.. hoops-football-baseball-hockey-offtopic and left at that..

let say youre a new poster that found the site...and you want to post a Piston trade idea you heard on another board...you could post it in 3 different spots lol...

just saying...

I kind of think that's one of the fundamental things about this site.

Most of the people here want more posters because that makes things more lively and entertaining, but I think we all want mainly only more intelligent posters, the kinds that will have no problem "figuring out" how the site's organized. I guess we're a bit elitist (or maybe just I am) but I think most here don't want to add posters at the expense of this place just turning into another ESPN or RealGM or something.

Again, I think getting rid of the subforums will get rid of some unneccessary confusion, but I personally can't stand the sites you go to with only 3-4 forums and you have to wade through everything to find what you're interested in. When I see those places, I generally don't go back.

Also, I think it may add more meaningless banter but actually restrict quality discussions because they're sooner popped off the front page and get lost in the mess. Then you end up with more and more repetitive threads because noone sees the original thread, etc..

Glenn has stated in the past that he'd take numbers over quality. I disagree with that position and generally post on boards that follow the reverse rule.

That's why I don't post on the Inferno site.

Well guys, I don't post here much and I lurked for quite a while before I finally joined, but I must say that this site kicks ass. Very well informed and humorous posts. I personally don't even sign in so that I can just hit the todays posts option, I like the way it is.

Again, I think getting rid of the subforums will get rid of some unneccessary confusion, but I personally can't stand the sites you go to with only 3-4 forums and you have to wade through everything to find what you're interested in. When I see those places, I generally don't go back.

Agreed.

Glenn has stated in the past that he'd take numbers over quality. I disagree with that position and generally post on boards that follow the reverse rule.


Huh?

If I said that I must have been drunk.

Do you remember the context of that? (I know that a link is too much to ask for)

Would I like it if we had more posters? Yes.

If we don't get quality ones, then I'm good with what we have.

If you guys just want more shitty posts, let me know. I can post more often. :(

If you guys just want more shitty posts, let me know. I can get SDB to post more often. :(

Fixed.

DUBBLE TRUTH

If you guys just want more shitty posts, let me know. I can post more often. :(

Me too!

(see what I mean?)

This site would get way more input from way more people...if it were set up at least.. hoops-football-baseball-hockey-offtopic and left at that..

let say youre a new poster that found the site...and you want to post a Piston trade idea you heard on another board...you could post it in 3 different spots lol...

just saying...

Piston trade ideas generated on other board are horrible.

just saying

Glenn has stated in the past that he'd take numbers over quality. I disagree with that position and generally post on boards that follow the reverse rule.

That's why I don't post on the Inferno site.
SI problems are born out of the radio show, not the forum setup. Even with the user activity that place has dead forums.
WTF has way too many. I've been here for years, and there are still subforums I haven't even looked at. There aren't many occasions where the number of active Users tops 30 at the same time. That's almost a forum per user. Focusing more people into a single topic is how you get coversation to thrive.


Sports General -Sub- (Detroit Sports (NBA,MLB,NHL,NFL,NCAA)
Non-Sports Merge with all of that other crap -Sub- (Politics)(Terror dome)
Central(merge front page, style)
Stands merge with Bukdow
Sports Book

At the very least , start jaming these "main" sub forums as tabbed sub forums under central directors (see the multitude of NBA subforums)

SI\ There aren't many occasions where the number of active Users tops 30 at the same time. That's almost a forum per user.

Dumb way to look at it, IMO.

Dumb way to look at it, IMO.
A user spends only so much time on a forum, time is lost spent moving between sub forums.
A limited amount of users posting in multiple forums amounts to ships passing in the night. Conversations stall and flounder on issues that would otherwise be popular if VIEWED by more than one person at the same time.
Nesting in forums starts because of the large network of forums to move through anyway.
Trying to isolate forums from discussion runs contrary to the very purpose of a forum. Activity encourages lurkers and vistors to register and participate.


There is something of a science behind this. You can develop models out of the data.
Average time spent viewing the forum.
Registered Users with Posts over 50.
Average daily lurking users.
Average users per hour.
When this = X , the number of forums should = Y

True, but I'm sure no one spends even a marginal amount of time every forum. For example, I spend no time in motor city style, Other sports, NCAA, The Stands, etc... I was just saying the forum to user ratio was sort of pointless because I'm sure the focus is on certain forums. Am I saying it couldn't be better organized? No, not at all.

True, but I'm sure no one spends even a marginal amount of time every forum. For example, I spend no time in motor city style, Other sports, NCAA, The Stands, etc... I was just saying the forum to user ratio was sort of pointless because I'm sure the focus is on certain forums. Am I saying it couldn't be better organized? No, not at all.
What you are saying is essentially the same thing I am, I just happen to be pointing out that because of this distribution, it makes sense to condense things.

Exactly, I spend a certain amount of time in this and that forums while not as much in the others. The forums I do spend time in I read most of what is posted and only read parts of the forums that don't spend that much time in. So this goes along with most of what has been said so I agree and disagree on some of this cuz of the forums and how they are set up.

I just don't understand why there's forums for the 2006 and 2007 Playoffs.

Other than that, everything's peachy... no complaints here.

I feel that what's being suggested would just kind of be "sweeping things under the rug," not necessarily improving things.

For example, I know I can't keep up with the Politics discussions on here and I generally have no interest in doing so. It's being proposed that the politics forum should be combined into the OT forum so that users like me will be "forced" to read these threads and potentially comment on them.

This would probably succeed to get me to post in a few of the politics threads, but since I'm not all that knowledgeable in the areas, and to be honest don't really have too much interest in the specifics of said areas, most of my posts would probably just be stupid one-liners or tangentical questions that don't really add to the discussion.

Thus, while the amount of posting would probably go up overall, most gains would be artificial, as volume would rise at the expense of overall quality. If I had anything to really offer, I'd go into the Politics forum itself but I dont and thus prefer things as is, so I don't have to wade through threads I'm not interested in.

If the forums were combined, threads would drop off the first page (of each forum, not the site) that much quicker and the level of long, in depth discussions would fall.

If the forums were combined, threads would drop off the first page (of each forum, not the site) that much quicker and the level of long, in depth discussions would fall.

Given the speed things move around here, nope.

Given the speed things move around here, nope.

That's easy and "witty" to say but simply not true. In the OT forum right now, the bottom thread is from 6/17 and the 4th from the bottom is from yesterday. If you combine all the forums like you want, there'll probably be day old threads on page 3 and they might never get the chance they deserve.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*cough*HAHAHAHAH!! POST OF THE YEAR. BUBBLES, YOU GOT BEAT DOWN PLAYA. JUST TUCK YOUR TAIL BETWEEN YOUR LEGS AND RUN AWAY...SPARE YOURSELF SOME DIGNITY HOMIE! DAAAAAAAAMN.

LMFAO.

(Also, sorry, didn't mean to be so confrontational...)

That's easy and "witty" to say but simply not true. In the OT forum right now, the bottom thread is from 6/17 and the 4th from the bottom is from yesterday. If you combine all the forums like you want, there'll probably be day old threads on page 3 and they might never get the chance they deserve. There are at least 12 threads on page one (not including the sticky) that are months/years old. That is what is pushing day old posts to the bottom constant topping of older threads. Threads that can go days without the next response. And when there is a response, it's always the same handful of people. That is not real activity. In a forum where people actually exists, the same threads don't get topped by :sirdouche: every single day. On a forum with users , conversations run their course threads are moved off the front page when people get sick of them. It's natural section forum style. Shit topics get shit on. Topping years old threads happens occasionally instead of every day to fill the page. Or every few days where the threads sit for weeks with little movement.
It's not like I'm pulling this shit from my ass, I've been posting on forums for a decade. (sad and true) I've been around on a few from beginning to end.

What we have here, and what I presume you are protecting , is a xenophobic clique that doesn't want anymore activity. I can respect that opinion. But it doesn't mean there is actually activity on that forum because the same group of people are talking to each other. If ya'll don't want to encourage new membership, that's fine, I hate people too.
Just don't insult my intelligence by calling OT an active forum. I can easily add up the posts from any given day on the entire forum, or just a single sub forum and illustrate how full of shit that is.

Originally Posted by SDB as Vincent
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*cough*HAHAHAHAH!! POST OF THE YEAR. BUBBLES, YOU GOT BEAT DOWN PLAYA. JUST TUCK YOUR TAIL BETWEEN YOUR LEGS AND RUN AWAY...SPARE YOURSELF SOME DIGNITY HOMIE! DAAAAAAAAMN.


Never stop fighting until the fight is done!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B7rDjX7s54

There are at least 12 threads on page one (not including the sticky) that are months/years old. That is what is pushing day old posts to the bottom constant topping of older threads. Threads that can go days without the next response. And when there is a response, it's always the same handful of people. That is not real activity. In a forum where people actually exists, the same threads don't get topped by :sirdouche: every single day. On a forum with users , conversations run their course threads are moved off the front page when people get sick of them. It's natural section forum style. Shit topics get shit on. Topping years old threads happens occasionally instead of every day to fill the page. Or every few days where the threads sit for weeks with little movement.
It's not like I'm pulling this shit from my ass, I've been posting on forums for a decade. (sad and true) I've been around on a few from beginning to end.

What we have here, and what I presume you are protecting , is a xenophobic clique that doesn't want anymore activity. I can respect that opinion. But it doesn't mean there is actually activity on that forum because the same group of people are talking to each other. If ya'll don't want to encourage new membership, that's fine, I hate people too.
Just don't insult my intelligence by calling OT an active forum. I can easily add up the posts from any given day on the entire forum, or just a single sub forum and illustrate how full of shit that is.
I want more posters, I think most do, but we don't want to sacrifice quality in exchange for volume. If we have to oversimplify and dumb the place down to get new posters, I'm going to have to say that those aren't the posters we really want/need. In general, I think we're pretty accepting of new people though. Maybe it is a little intimidating since many of us have known each other for so long, but that's nothing that's going to be solved by combining forums as far as I can see. Honestly, if one can't figure out that NBA goes in NBA, NFL in NFL and politics in politics, this probably isn't the place for them anyways, but I don't think that that's the problem. It takes 5 seconds to switch between forums so I don't think the time issue someone was complaining about applies either.

The point I haven't been able to see anyone make is how combining the forums will somehow magically lead to more quality posters. I just don't see it, and that's why I think it would be just sweeping things under the rug. You can combine the forums and make them artificially seem busier but all that does is make things seem better/busier, not fix them.

I wasn't trying to insult your intelligence saying the OT forum was active, I don't think I ever said that even. What I did say, and what was and is true, was that if the forums were combined, threads would drop off the first page quickly. I feel that that's just as detrimental to gaining new posters as you feel that having too many forums does. Now, whether that's because we're just "Topping off year old threads" is a separate issue altogether, one that has nothing to do with anything that was being discussed. Would you rather we made a different "Currently Listening To" thread every week? What would that solve?

Vinny > Bubbles.

Vinny > Bubbles.
Yeah, because vinny's status quo is working fantastically.

It's not about simplification , it's about more people being in the same parts of the forum at the same time. So they can interact. When people visiting this forum see ACTIVITY, they are more likely to join. Activity is built by forcing everyone into the same general area to bounce off some smaller walls into each other more frequently. Threads get more views and replies. There is more incentive to post NEW threads, instead of topping older threads. Most of which are "insider" threads that new members would not have much use for.
And trust me, you don't have to worry about quality vs quantity , before Bukdow we are all inferior.

It has nothing to do with that, he's just cooler than you are.

Yeah, because vinny's status quo is working fantastically. I've never said things are working (though I don't know that they're exactly all that dire...), I just don't see how combining the forums will fix things. We agree on the problem, I just think that combining the forums would camouflage things rather than fix them. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know.

I've never said things are working (though I don't know that they're exactly all that dire...), I just don't see how combining the forums will fix things. We agree on the problem, I just think that combining the forums would camouflage things rather than fix them. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know.

I do know, so stfu :mccosky:

It has nothing to do with that, he's just cooler than you are.

His name is Vinny, that goes without saying.

At least you admit it.

I want more posters, I think most do, but we don't want to sacrifice quality in exchange for volume. If we have to oversimplify and dumb the place down to get new posters, I'm going to have to say that those aren't the posters we really want/need. In general, I think we're pretty accepting of new people though. Maybe it is a little intimidating since many of us have known each other for so long, but that's nothing that's going to be solved by combining forums as far as I can see. Honestly, if one can't figure out that NBA goes in NBA, NFL in NFL and politics in politics, this probably isn't the place for them anyways, but I don't think that that's the problem. It takes 5 seconds to switch between forums so I don't think the time issue someone was complaining about applies either.

The point I haven't been able to see anyone make is how combining the forums will somehow magically lead to more quality posters. I just don't see it, and that's why I think it would be just sweeping things under the rug. You can combine the forums and make them artificially seem busier but all that does is make things seem better/busier, not fix them.

I wasn't trying to insult your intelligence saying the OT forum was active, I don't think I ever said that even. What I did say, and what was and is true, was that if the forums were combined, threads would drop off the first page quickly. I feel that that's just as detrimental to gaining new posters as you feel that having too many forums does. Now, whether that's because we're just "Topping off year old threads" is a separate issue altogether, one that has nothing to do with anything that was being discussed. Would you rather we made a different "Currently Listening To" thread every week? What would that solve?



That's like 600 words, homie. I'm not reading that.


I agree with Tre.

I got a little worked up for no reason, sorry. I don't really care too much either way, just wanted to see some logic behind it.

On a forum with users , conversations run their course threads are moved off the front page when people get sick of them.

It's self-regulating. Those threads are on the front page now exactly because people aren't sick of them. I will frequently fish one off the second or third page if I have something to add to one of the old, running bits.

Maybe it's just that most of the crap I post doesn't warrant a new thread, I don't know but it works for me. Ain't broke, don't fix.

While we're on the subject of boards with too many forums...

http://www.nflnews.com/forums/index.php

Yeesh.

While we're on the subject of boards with too many forums...

http://www.nflnews.com/forums/index.php

Yeesh.

:cogent:

While we're on the subject of boards with too many forums...

http://www.nflnews.com/forums/index.php

Yeesh.

So this is an NFL thread? Sorry, I didn't read it.

6/10

Seriously, how do I do it every day?!