New Forum Structure

I was thinking of something like that.
Click a filter in the Filters list to add it.
Click a Filter in the Current Filters list to remove it.

 

Well if that's what you have to do, the filtering system just needs to know the $_GET variables, then when you click the next filter it can save the old filter, while adding the new one

However, when i was messing with PHP i could never work out how to do something like this (and most of the people you can talk to about websites are elitist ba******)

 

easily done, I used to do it a lot.

 

Guardianstorm, not a bad idea only problem is every time you removed or added a filter you'd have to reload the page. So if you wanted to change a bunch of filters that would get a bit annoying. Unless it could be changed so that you could move filters around and when you're happy have an "apply" button.

 

guys i'm really happy to see this after that time............ i'm in egypt in internet cafe......... woooooooot

my holiday photos coming soon

thanks broters

 

Even better:



A hierarchical organisation of the filters. Click "All Hardware" to select all filters combined in that box. Click "All Software" to select all the filters in that box (basically, they are the subforums that people want to be able to access quickly). Click on individual filters to select just the one filter.

Drag and drop individual filters from any of the above three boxes into the "Currently Selected" box to select your own combination of filters. If it could remember that selection from visit to visit that would be great.

 

Nexxo: your idea is unfeasible, I personally thing there should be one box as before, but a more distinct seperation between them. So that the text isn't required, which, with the current tags isn't possible because they aren't readable at a glance. The option you have will take up too much screen estate.

 

It could be re-arranged: The headings could appear before or after the filter icons. It is more about arranging the filter icons in logical groups rather than having them mixed up, and being able to easily access a whole logical group of them.

 

The way I see it, is the tech support should be joined in each of the sections, software, hardware and AV. But Hardware, Software and AV should never ever be joined.

 

i think its just bloody confusing. loads a hell of a lot slower as well, due to all the extra icons :/

 

Would it be possible for Bit to add a members review tag for hardware and software? There are a plethora of different kinds of hardware by many different brands and since Bit can't review everything it would good if members did. I'm sure there a few members here that would like to share their experiences with hardware such as myself. It would boost the membership as I come across other forums when I have searched for hardware reviews on google.

 

Not sure if it's already been mentioned, but another annoying 'feature' of the filtering system is that when you go into one of the superforums and open up new tabs which are filtered by your particular areas of interest...when you look at each filtered tab, it marks all posts as being 'not-new'.

Obviously very annoying because you have to manually scan each thread to see if there have been any updates... or you just check the top 3 or 4 and ignore the rest.

 

That's a new one to me and it does do it if I open up a few tabs. Not sure why it's doing it but it must be something to do with the way VB works.

 

Just use subscriptions, that'll tell you if there have been new posts.

 

Isn't that a rather long and inconvenient way around??

 

If I'm interested by a thread then I either reply or add a subscription.
I then get sent notifications if there are more replies.

Doesn't seem long or inconvenient to me.

 

What about new thread that you haven't come across before? Must you subscribe to every thread to figure out what is new and what is not? Come to that, how would you know if you have subscribed to a given thread?

The fact is, the majority of members don't read every thread. Or even every thread in a given forum. And certainly not every thread in today's 'super-forums'. So most people filter according to their interests. Filtering clears the 'new-post' flags, therefore you have no way of knowing which threads are new (to you). Subscribing to an existing thread means you will receive emails (if you select that option) but not for any new threads.

Solutions? Perhaps, it could not reset the flags until the user has selected their filter(s)? But that means that for smaller forums, or for those that don't use the filters, will not be a means of marking threads as Read. This is where the filtering paradigm breaks down.

So under the new system, you have to go to extra effort to get back to where you started. It's not good.

 

the beauty of subscriptions is that you don't have to trawl through the whole forum, just have a look once in a while.
perhaps you need to stop trying to check that you've seen absolutely everything you might find interesting on the forums.

I do agree that the flags should still work, but I'm not going to blame bit-tech for it.

 

Subscriptions are a useful feature but I think you are overestimating them. How do you subscribe to a thread? You need to open the thread in the first place. So how do we know which threads are new and which aren't - by the read/unread falg... back to square one.

The stated intention of these changes was to get more people to view more-and-different threads. Although you don't speak for BT, you reckon we should not bother about following our interests so closely.

Combining both of these means we will have effectively randomised your average punters BT experience. Tail wagging dog anyone?

Quite right - no need to blame BT.

It was George Bush?! Er....Garry Glitter? Perhaps Bill Gates is up to his tricks again?

Er...no, looks like this is BTs fault after all. No problem. I'm sure after a year of discussions and tweaks, we'll be back to the same level of functionality as before.

 

Bugs in the software are the fault of the software developers, not the users.