UKC

We haven't had this thread for a while.

Am I the only one who finds that trawling through threads to see if someone has replied to me to be utterly tedious? I'm not talking avatars and karma points here, just some basic technology that's been around for ages. Embedding media would be nice though.

Waddayasay Nick Smith? I bet Paul Phillips is on my side.

In reply to jonny2vests: here-here!

In reply to jonny2vests:

Hmmm.. change...

Scary!

In reply to jonny2vests: I was just thinking exactly the same, some way of seeing replies without having to trawl would be excellent.

In reply to jonny2vests: That would be the equivalent of bolting a trad route,,,,, not cool,,,

In reply to jonny2vests: It ain't broke, so I'd be very cautious about fixing it.

Which is not to say it should stay as it is, but such changes as are made should be unequivocal improvements rather than the web coding equivalent of this year's blonde.

T.

In reply to jonathan shepherd:

Not to worry. Someone from UKC towers will be along presently to inform us that there are plans afoot, its under development, any day now. Splendid.

I mean, they must have realised by now that they're using the internet equivalent of talking through tin cups.

In reply to Pursued by a bear:

What are you scared of? Do you think pictures in books are the work of the devil?

In reply to jonny2vests: mobile compatibility would be nice. It's abit crap zooming in and out of every page i scroll though on here.

In reply to Double Knee Bar:

I made this exact point on a similar thread a while back...and was told that it was quite alright the way it was and we didnt want change round here thank you very much.

Im all up for a bit of modernisation myself...but it may be that we have to wait for a certain demographic to die first! Remember the awful fuss about changing the forum logos??

In reply to jonny2vests: I'd rather change was significant and positive than incremental or fashionable. Coding done by a late adopter rather than a trend leader will on the whole maintain site harmony, I believe.

T.

In reply to kieran b:

Haha. I wish they'd hurry up. A mobile site would be nice.

In reply to jonny2vests:
Oh, we're only talking another 10,20 years at the most

In reply to jonny2vests:

I quite like the way it is.
Any chance you could give a Link to a forum that has the functionality that you're after?

In reply to jonny2vests: Ahh... just post either bullshit or such profound replies that all answers are irrelevant. Then one need not worry about foolish opinions of the downtrodden wretches that haunt these forums

How's Canada? Sheffield's just the same really.

In reply to kieran b:

Oh, we're only talking another 10,20 years at the most

Be careful what you wish for, I'm the same age as you...

In reply to Pursued by a bear:

I'm talking about knowing when your being spoken to. I'd say that's pretty fundamental.

And how you think UKC doesn't qualify as a late adopter defies belief - its the most archaic forum in the galaxy. And its not like they'll have to do that much coding, they can just use an off the shelf package.

In reply to MJ:

Me too, I'm always trying to 'mark all as read' on other forums and can't do it.

In reply to jonny2vests:

You should try UK Caving.

In reply to MJ:

Pretty much anything that uses phpBB has the basics. Check out:

http://squamishclimbing.com/squamish_climbing_bb/viewforum.php?f=8&sid=...

In reply to jonny2vests:

Agreed. Being able to link to users, routes, crags would be good, as would being able to see replies without rummaging through threads. It's starting to look pretty clunky.

In reply to deepstar:

But at least you get smilies there.

In reply to shaun l:

Lakey - I'm good mate. Canada is just the same too I'm guessing, but still new enough for me. I miss Sheffield a bit, and sea cliffs, but not enough to come home just yet.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I hinted at the age of the forum software a while ago and did sense a grumbling from the other inhabitants..

We're a long way from monochrome green monitors and telnet connections but a few 20th century touches would be nice.

In reply to jonny2vests:
Clicking on my name up at the top of the page works OK for me, & works OK on mobile (old nokia, not some funked-up thang!).
UKC loads a lot quicker than other sites, I'd hate that to change.

I hardly visit Outdoors magic (for example), it takes too long, stupid emoticon cartoons, lots of wasted space... It is quite nice to have the first few lines of a topic appear when you hover over it, though.

Keep it as it is, I say.

In reply to deepstar:

The forum software that UK Caving uses is infinitely more advanced than this. Whether they, or the users have chosen to turn it on or not is down to them.

In reply to thin bob:

None of that has to change. The speed of the page load is down to the server and the quality of the geeks behind it. I happen to know that UKC has a couple of Jedis back there. It'd be fine.

I'm guessing you and other dissenters are not really that familiar with how these things work.

In reply to jonny2vests:


Disagree entirely. What makes these forums good, IMHO, is the fact that it is bespoke and tailored to climbing. I'm not saying a few minor improvements wouldn't go amiss, but definitely not an off-the-shelf package like UKB - sorry, I find that interface really annoying, and singletrackworld isn't much better.

What I like about UKC is the link to profiles, and the data (or lack of it) contained within. Means you can easily work out if someone is genuine or not

In reply to jonny2vests:


wrong. Thats just one factor.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Agrred! And yes, J2V, too right: i have just about 0 idea how these things work...only that they do. and i don't care too much for embedded/indented threads, it spreads all over the screen. Signature lines, quoted text in boxes and avatars are pure gash & a waste of space.

(if this is not what you mean, apologies!)

In reply to jonny2vests: Glad you're doing well, I did the coast to coast with Hincey just after you left. He's still a bit of a chubster but couldn't fault his bike riding and perseverance! Then he took me to a strip club and gave me 150 quid. F*cking mint night!

Well you're off in Canada, Dave's moved to China, all the oldies have deserted me! I'm having to climb with young whippersnappers these days. Enjoy talking to aliens or whatever it is you're doing and I'll try and keep the gritstone warm!

In reply to jonny2vests:


works fine with chrome on jellybean.

In reply to dissonance:

No, it's 2 factors.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I'm a member on a lot of forums (at least 10), and I frequently visit UKC, trials-forum.co.uk and forums.overclockers.co.uk. This is by far the worst in terms of UI usability and functionality. It's missing such routinely boring things like the ability to be notified when someone quotes you, and to provide you with a link to take you there. Come on UKC, move with the times!

In reply to dissonance:

Nobody's saying it doesn't work. Try reading from the top.

In reply to jonny2vests:

After some time away and coming back, I like this style. It is more like a conversation/debate/argument with everyone just chipping in and saying their bit.

In reply to Muel:
It's missing such routinely boring things like the ability to be notified when someone quotes you, and to provide you with a link to take you there. Come on UKC, move with the times!


nooooo!! my inbox is clogged up enough as it is!
If it's that important, I'll make the (minor) effort to go check a thread.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Obvious feature missing - a button to go to the latest post in a thread. Without it, I just ignore anything that has become a threadnaught because I can't be bothered scrolling down through walls of posting.

Being able to +/- threads and people also gives the option of expressing your disagreement or disgust with them without having to resort to shitposting.

Other than that, it's great, a lot easier to read than many.

In reply to Castleman:

yeah! I like the occasional misapprehensions ("no, you're a c0ck" "actually, you are, as this survey shows" "no, sorry, I meant the other c0ck" "oh, fair enough. But you smell" etc etc)

In reply to shaun l:

Wow, good effort putting up with Hincy for that long He was at the fieldy reunion, he nearly talked me into the floor.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Just how long does it take to go to Search>Forums and put under 'Message text' your name? Circa 3-4 seconds.

In reply to danm:


I'd like to be able to tag particular threads for later reference - I'm forever thinking 'that's interesting/useful, I'll come back to that', then finding a month later I can't remember what the title was and have to wade through the search function, often with no luck

In reply to thin bob:

Inbox? Nah I mean like Facebook notifications. All it needs is a little popout box, a list of activities (people replying to you, sending you a private message etc), and a link to each one. Nearly all other forums have it.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Is that how you do it Gordon? (Snigger) There's a much easier way than that.
And 3-4 seconds is long time on the web.

And, you misunderstand the issue. Finding out what threads you've contributed to is easy. But to see whether someone has replied TO YOU, you have to search each individual thread. In the days of Web 2.0, that's like trying to go to space on a tractor.

In reply to jonny2vests: I like it just how it is.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

What would be nice is a few extra features that the user could choose to switch on or not.

(I'd give it a week before you turned on 'tell me when people reply to me')

In reply to jonny2vests: Lol

In reply to jonny2vests:


I think there's a difference in attitude here. I think that if it's that important then you'll find them, or they'll find you or you'll decide you've got a life and aren't that arsed in the grand scheme of things.

T.

In reply to danm:

Obvious feature missing - a button to go to the latest post in a thread.

I use the 'END' key on my keyboard for that. Pressing 'HOME' takes you to the top of the page.

In reply to jonny2vests:

http://xkcd.com/1172/

In reply to jonny2vests:

Thanks for the link: -

http://squamishclimbing.com/squamish_climbing_bb/viewforum.php?f=8&sid=...

That's pretty much the type of format that I don't like...

In reply to Chris the Tall:

That doesn't have to change. Given a good dev team, a forum package, such as vBulletin, can be tailored to whatever needs you've got. Remember community sites with news and forums, such as stuff based on PHP-Nuke and Xoops? I know of at least one site that migrated from them to the completely dissimilar vBulletin yet maintained the same look, feel and functionality, while adding modern features.

So, no matter what they do, to do it properly they need a good team and time. They have the former, IMHO, the latter might be lacking.

In reply to Alkis:

I use a forum for - don't laugh - knitting, which has loads of great features (it enables tagging of yarns, patterns, users, groups etc (for which read crags, routes, users etc)), it was built by hand by one bloke, it has lots of self-moderated subgroups (which may be irrelevant here) but it has over two million registered users enjoying its functionality.

I think on that basis that some gentle tweaks to develop UKC a little further can't be that tricky...

And, having just had to delete and repost to amend something, why can't we at least have an 'edit' button?

In reply to Tall Clare: Because it makes a mockery of having a discussion if people can go back and "edit" posts; just post, post a follow-up to clarify if needs be.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

There is that...

In reply to jonny2vests:

and still only part of the page load issue, unless you care to explain just what magic world you live in where increasing amount of data doesnt result in increased download time?

In reply to jonny2vests:


i have tried reading what you put but to be honest the marketing buzzword style attempts at tech terminology makes it hard.
Now you were complaining about a lack of a mobile site, thing is if you have a half decent site and a proper mobile browser it works just fine. Well until you start loading it down with avatars, sigs and other wastes of space.

In reply to jonny2vests:

It takes a long time to wake the bears and they get grumpy when you criticise them too much...

I brought this up with them a couple of years ago... my example of progress was the paragliding forum

In reply to jonny2vests: Transferring a whole forum from one software to another is an absolute nightmare, I've done it once.

May be best to install a new phpbb forum, and start from that point. Anyone wanting to reopen a debate would have to start it afresh.

In reply to jonny2vests: not being able to embed video or pictures to threads is probably the biggest problem with the current format.

In reply to all:

Thanks for the feedback; some useful comments there.

We have no plans to go to an off-the-shelf (OTS) package mainly because we have been continually praised over the years for having slightly different forums. This does mean that some of the features you get with OTS packages aren't present, however for many users I think that is probably a good thing. Speed is an important issue for us and is something where the UKC forums perform very well. Maybe it is becoming less important now that most people have faster connections though.

It has always been possible to get a RSS feed of your forum threads so that you can see when someone replies to threads you have posted on - http://www.ukclimbing.com/general/rss.html
RSS feeds are becoming a little out-of-date now though so maybe it is time we looked at updating that.

I am fairly confident that users don't want photos in posts since this has been asked a number of times over the years and the response has always been a resounding 'no'.

Over the next few months we will be doing a new user survey which has a question about the forums so you can have your vote and say there.

Alan

In reply to jonny2vests:

Shhhh .. I like this format. I'm comfortable. Change is painful.

In reply to jonny2vests:

This runs great ony iPhone. No change necessary! X

In reply to bouldery bits:

How do you scroll to the bottom of a really long thread on your iPhone?

In reply to Sir Chasm:

Really? It doesnt seem to have made a mockery on every other forum im on that allows this

As for mobiles...if i want to browse UKC on my iphone, either i have to have the text really small (and my eyes arent getting any younger!) or i have to keep scrolling left and right to read a post...puts me off using it when im not at my laptop

In reply to dissonance:

Eh? This was what I said:

"Am I the only one who finds that trawling through threads to see if someone has replied to me to be utterly tedious? I'm not talking avatars and karma points here, just some basic technology that's been around for ages. Embedding media would be nice though."

Marketing buzzwords?


No, I said it would be nice when someone else suggested it.


Maybe try reading from the top again where I explicitly talk down avatars etc. And the point of a mobile site mirror is that its normally a stripped down version of the site, optimised for mobile devices. No resizing, no death by scrolling, minimalistic appearance, fast loading.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Thanks for the info Alan. If the RSS feed could tell me when someone has replied TO ME, rather than the thread, then that would certainly be something.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

You have a point. One way to handle that is to tag posts with "edited N times" followed by a link to the edits. A slightly cleaner way is to ban post edits once someone else has posted below you.

In reply to bouldery bits: it could be so much better though. The format just isnt really convenient for viewing on an iphone. Zoom in, Zoom out, scroll left, scroll right.

As others have said, the best thing about the format of these forums is the lack of signatures. Don't change that.

In reply to Double Knee Bar:

Get a better phone/browser. No need to scroll left or right on any phone i've used in the past 4 years.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Generally I find the forums easy to use on desktops but on tablets and phones it's a pain. In no particular order, some are needed others are nice to have.:

1. Long threads need a "go to last post" button otherwise you are scrolling for ages.
2. The forums are table based which really don't play well with small screens. Things have moved on and there are means to get round this.
3. Allow a user to collapse a thread to any point. The final effect would be similar to the "xxx posts already read" feature that seems to be time based.
4. The ability to mark individual threads as of interest. In effect personal "sticky" threads.
5. Sort threads in other ways than by time. Have threads that the user has replied to take priority for example.

ALC

In reply to Alkis:

I use Dolphin on my Galaxy S2, which has ways of jumping to the top/bottom of web pages.

In reply to freerangecat:

There's an area to the right of the address bar in Safari on the iPhone/iPad that let's you jump to the top of the page. It used to be easy to tap but in recent versions the search field has got larger so it's not so obvious. There's no way built in to the system (that I know of) to jump to the foot of web pages.

The simplest way is to have a fixed footer or header with the necessary controls in it. This does take up screen space though. It's a battle between OS chrome, browser chrome and individual page controls.

ALC

In reply to kieran b: Can we have a link to one of those forums? So we can see what sort of things you'd prefer.

In reply to a lakeland climber:

The entire top of the screen does that actually.

In reply to jonny2vests:

You obviously take yourself way too seriously and have way too much time on your hands. Embedding media - there are whole sites dedicated to that. Put up a link.. to find posts use Ctrl F and enter your user name. It really isn't difficult and it's also a quick site - no shite (avatars, animations, other embedded crap)making pages take forever to load.

In reply to jonny2vests: One thing that is really missing is larger pictures in the gallery. It's a shame to see absolutely splendid shots in such small resolution and tiny filesize. Sort it out UKC!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


I'll say it now, I'd love to have inline photos and videos. It's a right pain having to open up links just to look at a photo.

Looking forward to the survey.

In reply to higher.alpine:

You can get them full size - click on the thumbnail and they'll enlarge to pretty much full screen size.

In reply to tony: You're not serious...are you?

That's the thing... if the users and owners are, like you, IT dinosaurs, then it'll stay like this forever.

The UKC forums are outdated. Simple as that.

In reply to higher.alpine: So I can get an idea of what you mean, could you link to a forum you like?

In reply to higher.alpine:
Sorry, I'm not sure what the problem is. You want to see something bigger than a thumbnail, I point out how to do it.

In reply to mattrm:

I'll say it now, I'd love to have inline photos and videos. It's a right pain having to open up links just to look at a photo.

I find that makes threads unwieldly. Maybe a clickable thumbnail instead?

In reply to a lakeland climber:

Another to add to the list:

6. The drop down menus as well as the thumbnail preview on links to the gallery don't work particularly well on iOS. They appear when pressed/tapped/clicked but don't disappear.

ALC

In reply to higher.alpine:

this seems to be a recurring theme on this thread

keen people post saying how there are all these innovations that in their opinion would make the forum better

most people not persuaded that these things would be an improvement at all

keen people seem to take the hump and decide that everyone that disagrees with them on the internet is wrong...




from my point of view- some of the things suggested, like being able to jump to the last post on long threads seem like entirely sensible suggestions

others- like avatars, 'like' buttons, and media in the posts, would definitely degrade the experience. clicking on a link to see a photo or video is so trivially inconvenient i dont see it as a problem that needs fixing...

cheers
gregor

In reply to tony:

I think Rockstoned is asking for the actual full image size limit to be increased. That seems reasonable nowadays wit cheaper memory.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:


I agree. UKC is still refreshingly 'clean', like the google homepage. That sort of thing doesn't age.

In reply to jonny2vests:

The one simple thing I miss on ukc that forums have is a button to view the new posts since my last visit.

In reply to Papillon:

I agree. UKC is still refreshingly 'clean', like the google homepage. That sort of thing doesn't age.

LIKE!!!

In reply to Papillon:

yup. maybe its just my age, but cluttered, 'noisy' pages irritate me. perhaps its my own declining information processing capacity, but i find them more effort to interact with.

with ukc, its just plain text in a familiar format- effortless and relaxing on my poor, tired neurones...



and all the other stuff is just a click away, if i want it- which is fine for me,

cheers
gregor

In reply to MJ:

...but no one uses the google home page any more because you can type search queries straight into browsers. Google are innovators - while their home page may look similar, the way it's run and all the back end stuff is a million miles from where it started.

In reply to Papillon:

Ah, that might make sense - I thought he was complaining about only being able to see thumbnails. I'm sure the upper limit on file sizes was increased a while ago. There would, of course, be a whole load of older photos which were subject to the original size restrictions.

I guess one of the problems for this sort of thing is that the range of devices being used to view images will vary from smartphones all the way through tablets up to big TV screens, with very different degrees of connectivity. As an IT dinosaur, I have no idea how this is dealt with.

In reply to iccy:

It's precisely their innovations that now deter me from using google.

In reply to Papillon:

Actually photo uploads are still the vast bulk of our bandwidth costs which haven't really changed in the last few years, so this isn't something that would be cheaper for us.

The 1000 pixel size was decided on a few years ago (probably 2008 or so) when 62% of monitors were 1024 pixels wide or smaller. Nowadays that figure has changed to 91% being wider than 1024 pixels so it may be time to look at it again.

(Source - http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp )

One factor though is that standard web fixed page widths have pretty much stayed at around 950 to 1024 ish pixels wide inspite of these much larger monitors. I think browsing habits are now to keep multiple windows open at once hence people don't want vast width browser pages which tend to be more difficult to read anyway. If we did allow wider photos then I think that would have to be done by a pop-up viewer since people wouldn't want to resize their browser screen just to look at wider images.

Obviously this is all possible, but it is also a lot of work and it costs time and money to develop, and would probably increase our bandwidth costs. We have plenty of other aspects of the site and a limited budget so it isn't something that we can necessarily do instantly, however the feedback is all welcome.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I quite like the idea of photos in posts but realise how open to abuse this is - one only has to look at some of the SuperTopo threads. At the moment links to UKC photos when moused over show the thumbnail. Would a sort of compromise be possible where when you mouse over the link you see the full size photo without having to click on it and then click off?

In reply to Sir Chasm:
http://www.indiamike.com/india/

though of course you would have to create a profile to be able to post a reply to a thread to see the edit option.

In reply to jonny2vests:

i think you might have said a tad more than that.


web 2.0, late adopters and so forth. normal spiel.


wow thanks for telling me that. I never knew.
Now lets take them in turn.


cant say its a problem using a modern mobile browser.


not a problem aside from on massive threads which would hit anything. plus again a modern browser gives various fast scroll options.


you mean like now?

In reply to jon:


problem with that is those pictures are loaded as part of the main page load.
Thumbnail you dont notice but the full size one would prove interesting bandwidth wise.

In reply to Tall Clare:

That would be ravelry?

Lady Blue spends significant time on there, and is also rapidly approaching SABLE.

In reply to John_Hat:

Yes! If you've ever looked at it, it's a really well thought out bespoke setup.

In reply to Tall Clare:

Nope, not seen it, just she's talked about it. I may get her to show me later, assuming that I can find my way past the piles of fabric and wool in her office to get to the approximate location of her desk....

In reply to John_Hat:

The way users can link to yarn, patterns and other users is the bit I think would be really good for UKC, translated to routes, crags and other users obviously!

In reply to Alkis:

It's good finger training! Better than a beastmaker!

In reply to kieran b:

I completely accept you can have an edit function, I just don't this k it's a worthwhile feature.
Interesting site, is it possible for users to turn off the sidebar on the left and have all the posts on a thread on one page?

In reply to Tall Clare:

My wife is currently going through Ravelry withdrawal as we've moved and won't have access to the internet for another two weeks other than at work.

It's not a bad layout, I didn't last very long though, I got banned within an hour which apparently is a bit of a record for that site!

In reply to jonny2vests: A spell and gramer cheker, is definitily needed; it would stamp out the pedents!!!!!!!!

In reply to Toby S:

Blimey! It has so many hidden corners that there's something for everyone.

In reply to Sir Chasm:
not sure SC, ill explore.
But yes, it is a fantastically well-thought out forum, very user-friendly and also fast.

In reply to Loughan:

...tease

In reply to jonny2vests: Don't you just go onto your own profile and have a quick look at the threads you've posted on rather than trawl the forums?

I'm a web developer and website designer of 15 years.

http://www.camptocamp.org

Now THAT is how you build a climbing website!

In reply to higher.alpine: It doesn't tell you who a post is in reply to (useful for following discussions) and most of the language seems to stay in French even when you click the English tab.
Do you mean that's how you built a climbing website?

In reply to higher.alpine:

Now THAT is how you build a climbing website!

Bit hard to judge how good it is, as no one seems to actually use it.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Can you just browse through a bunch of nice pics, or do you have to actively search for something?

In reply to higher.alpine:

You are joking, of course?

In reply to MJ:
Not true. I would look at the website a little harder.

In reply to Sir Chasm:
That's not true. Look harder.

You mean on the route and crag descriptions?

That website is built by the French and sponsored mainly by the department of Rhone Alps (and even by the British Alpine Club and EU) and since the routes are mainly in France and Switzerland and thus the users are mainly French speakers, the routes have been filled in using this language.

You're free to add any content in any language you wish as a user. It's an open platform rather than one supported by gear manufacturers & advertising, which I believe UKC to be (I have no problem with that).

In reply to jon: Is your concern with the ease of use, lack of a feature, or with the content, or what? I suspect that you have an issue with the routes and descriptions (I know some of them have been lifted from copyrighted guidebooks)

I'm specifically speaking of the website software. Would be nice if you could explain Jon

In reply to higher.alpine: Tis true too, if you look in the threads it doesn't show who you are replying to.
Is that the best example of a nice, user-friendly site you can find?

In reply to jonny2vests:

This site, unlike most, works great with IE6. Until work get around to upgrading us I'm happy for no changes to take place.

I'm selfish like that.

In reply to MJ:

Well surely people would go elsewhere if it weren't for UKC's popularity? Perhaps Camptocamp would get more UK users and more user contributed content if it had the UKC audience?

UKC has 'grabbed' most of the UK's online climbing community. I hope it appreciates this and understands that in return for a priviliged audience which it can market to advertisers and gear manufacturers as its asset, it should provide the best possible solution to their needs. Don't get me wrong - I look at this forum 3 or 4 times a day!

In reply to Sir Chasm:
See: http://www.camptocamp.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=226370&p=3

In reply to higher.alpine: Is it an option then? Because the threads I looked at didn't have that. No matter, if you think that's a nice, user-friendly site that's fine by me.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Yes, but show me one person on this thread who has asked for that.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Haha, funny. I know what you mean, it's like trying to punch fog - apologies to tony

tony - the whole screen size thing is actually a non-issue. Web browsers know how big your screen is and can act accordingly if you program them to.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I think the forum software is pretty damn good. Indeed, I've often referred people to this forum as an example of very well functioning example of a discussion forum. A neat way jumping straight to responses to your posts might be a good addition, perpaps with a small notice up next to your username (top-right), and outwith RSS, perhaps some aesthetic alterations might be possible, but I don't think there is anything broke that needs fixed. I can't stand these forums that show avatars, signatures with quotes, and are plastered with pictures. So good job guys.. ..keep up the good work!

In reply to Jimbo W:

Indeed, I'd be surprised, presuming it were amenable, if you couldn't package your software and sell it.

In reply to Loughan:

Your browser should do that.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Embedded media would allow supertopo style trip reports which would be great to see.

Although UKC would probably be full of the following: Considered climbing a v diff, went home and complained about change on the internet.

In reply to dissonance:

Oh dear, late adopters was someone else's phrase, back to the top you go, maybe do thinking really really hard this time.

Web 2.0 has been in common use for 10+ years and means the modern internet. It's nothing to do with marketing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0

In reply to Jimbo W: Nobody would buy it. I'm not saying the current UKC website is broken or doesn't work - there's a difference in saying it could do so much more and do it slicker.

People wouldn't buy it because there are far too many open source platforums, and you can turn off features in the backend or the template (avatars and such) and customise the forum to your liking. You have to subscribe to an XML list for replies!? Come on!

In reply to Jimbo W:

I agree with all of that. That's what I'm asking about.

In reply to Cameron94:

Yes, of course. But that doesn't tell you if someone has replied to you.

In reply to Jimbo W:

To people who say this - this is highly subjective! If you don't know how it could be better, how will you want it? You will stick to what you're used to. That means legacy bespoke forum software from 10+ years ago

In reply to higher.alpine:

Are you referring to the quote box? It means that if you want someone to know who you are replying to you have to select the text and that option EVERY time.

Sorry, I hadn't noticed your reply to me. I use C2C all the time - every day. However, its search facility is so crap/annoying/over complicated, that it's a joke and I just don't use it now preferring to google what I want and add Camptocamp. I am not the only one to do this - it was brought up in a thread recently.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Yes, and its inevitable security holes.

In reply to jonny2vests:

ermm you used the phrase so shows happy enough


nah i really cant be bothered wasting time with a troll or a clueless muppet. If i want that i can bimble over and find what our sales bods are promising.


well done you found wikipedia. The thing is nowadays outside of some management or sales teams no one i know uses it seriously. Its a buzzword which people think sounds cool without having to understand technology.

In reply to dissonance:


I used the phrase 'late adopters'. What's your problem with it?

T.

In reply to Pursued by a bear:

Too many syllables.

In reply to jonny2vests:


not necessarily more than any brought in system with the obvious advantage it needs a personalised attack. Unlike if you bring in software where once it is compromised chances are a automated scan and attack will quickly follow for that vulnerability making you hope a)the devs patch it quickly and b)you can then apply it quickly.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Is it a complete non-issue? The actual size might be, but the resolution varies according to the file size - what works okay on a small screen can look terrible on a big screen, while a file big enough to look okay on a big screen would be terrible overkill on a small screen (with attendant bandwidth issues).

In reply to Pursued by a bear:


on its own its a bit of a red flag with all the other stuff he was coming out with straight into buzzwords.
I am surprised he isnt raving about silicon roundabout yet.

In reply to jon:
Look you click on 'reply with quote' for a particular post and it'll indicate who you're replying to?? Only if you want to reply to the OP you have to go back to the first page of the thread, which is the most insignificant annoyance. I don't understand what you're referring to other than that?

How come I use C2C every day too and I don't have a problem with it? You can search individual parts of the website separately (a brilliant useful feature lacking on UKC) - the only thing missing looks to be a generic search.

And have you tried to search on UKC? You only get a generic google search with the results consisting of every indiscriminate scrap of text from all over the place. That's far more annoying!

In reply to tony:

Yes, so a common approach is to pre-cache (on the server) a few different sizes for common devices. Simple. After that, file size, image size, screen size, they're all known variables and solutions are well established.

I noticed yesterday actually that UKC have started tackling the mobile device issue. In the picture gallery, from an iPad, I can now swipe through photos. Which is nice.

In reply to higher.alpine:

I don't use UKC in the same way that I use C2C and therefore hardly ever use the search facility on UKC. You are replying to me from a web designer's point of view. I'm replying to you as a non computer savvy user of a website. From my point of view and others I've spoken to, C2C search is just not friendly.

As for the 'répondre en citant' yes of course it's not hard to use, but very few people use it and therefore it fails. And if they did it'd take up a huge amount of space. The advantage with the UKC system is that the 'reply to' is automatic.

In reply to dissonance:

I think maybe you need a hug from your mummy. If you open conversations with clear attacks, then you shouldn't be surprised when you receive like for like.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Those forums where you get an email everytime someone replied to thread, or liked your inane blithering are only popular with people who regard spam as a personal message and spend their days fumblign in their shorts and watching Cash in the Attic.

UKC works, like a Kalashnikov. It might not be the newest, or the most sexy, but you can bury Alan in the ground, dig him up 3 months later and he'll work (subject to greasing him in a few places).

In reply to jonny2vests:
Thank you - a genuinely useful answer. I live and learn.

In reply to John Rushby:

Yes, I agree (although turning it off is usually trivial), but who is asking for that?

In reply to jonny2vests:


eh what?
Definitely bored with you now, you seem to be taking the seagull approach.

In reply to tony:

You are welcome sir.

In reply to jonny2vests:

i use a number of other unrelated forums that look similar to this, I FAR prefer the look, feel and usability of the UKC forums.

In reply to John Rushby:

Even Alan might occasionally require a new shirt.

Personally, I tend to agree with many posters that there's some useful functionality that could be added, and with the speed of movement in IT these days having a site which has remained functionally identical in terms of the main forums since I joined 10 years ago is a little odd, and does rather indicate a strong desire not to move with the times.

Personally I think there is a problem in an attitude to change which is "oh, we might do a survey in a few months", and would love to see some new things in this neck of the woods.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Because you helped develop it and are blind to its faults ???


If I don't know which section I want or what information is where then an overarching search mechanism is far more useful.


We'll have to beg to differ.

You could have the most wonderful site in the world (though camptocamp isn't that - personally I find it too messy/disjointed), but without content it isn't much use and for an English speaker (with moderate to OK French) there is often not enough on camptocamp and it gets drowned out by the French content.

In reply to MJH:
Fail.

You don't know what you're talking about. Read what I said. It's better to have section search AND generic search. Understand?

Where did ANYONE say C2C is the best website in the world? WTF? Suit yourself. It's far better done the UKC could hope to be in it's present state. Perhaps if you understood web technology and it's use better, and perhaps did a gamut of different activities like I do, you'd agree with me.

And disjointed? It has separate settings for the different mountain principles. That is exactly how it's supposed to be.... that's hilariously misjudged isn't it.

I for sure agree with people who have said that punters are scared of change.

I quote the Dunning–Kruger effect. You cannot know something is better and make a judgement about it if your crap & your senses are undeveloped at that subject!

In reply to fxceltic:

Yes, I can see now that's probably not going to wash. I'm happy to go with the flow and stick with this plus a few obvious (optional?) add ons. Like a proper RSS feed.

In reply to John_Hat:

Sorry but if you think we haven't moved on in the last ten years then I suggest you have a look at this - http://web.archive.org/web/20030206024900/http://www.ukclimbing.com/

Remember that to us, UKC is a huge site with many different sections on it, all of which require our attention, and one of which is a forum. This also includes Rockfax guidebooks which some might say have changed a bit in the last ten years.

Although the look of the forums may not have changed that much I can assure you that the forums themselves have changed massively during that time.

Anyway, as we always have done, we are listening and will be including some questions relating to the forums in our new User Survey. After we have done the huge and significant changes that we have planned for the Logbook section, we may have a look at the Forums and add some more features which will be based on what the users request on the User Survey.

Not moving with the times .... ?

Hmmm...

Alan

In reply to higher.alpine:

So eloquent, but avoiding the point...


Where did I say that it wasn't better to have both? I said that a generic search was more useful to the casual visitor...understand?


Sorry but you are misunderstanding English - I didn't say that you claimed that.


Errr no. I know a fair bit about web development and CtoC is a good example of something that tries to do too much (IMO).


Just because something is designed that way doesn't stop it feeling disjointed from a user perspective.


Equally don't always assume that you know best...particularly if you have no idea about the person you are talking to. You really need to take a step back and stop taking things so personally - I have no problem if you disagree with me as we are talking about opinion rather than fact on most of these points, but given that I am one of your target users (and not the only one who has expressed some problem with CtoC) then you might wonder if there is any truth in the criticism.

In reply to higher.alpine:


Of course it's subjective, and aesthetics doesn't have to mean extra functionality... ...I'm, quite happy with quick loading, easy to read, and a luck of visual clutter. I'm programmer, but I ran a folk music website a few years ago in which I wroked out how to fuse "phorum" with a CMS called "snews". It worked well, but I spent quite a while looking for off the peg modifiable forum scripts either free or for a small fee, and found nothing that even when stripped down did the quick, easy to read, secure thing well... ...I played with a number of solutions and eventually found phorum seemed to work well, but after a few years I gave up on the constant mods required to maintain the sites security.

We don't "mod" the way we speak all the time, and forums represent a basic form of internet "speak", which can be gloriously clunky... ...in my view, this site does the basics damn well.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Ah, the good old days, when you could buy a pint, a pastie and a woman for less than a fiver and still have time to tell FH he's a moldering old flap.

whatever happened to that JCT woman?

In reply to John Rushby:



and when the only vaguely religion threads were anti-top roping.

In reply to MJH:
My goodness. The answer is NO!
But generic search is always there?
Subjective. How do you integrate all these different activities under one website? It does much more than most, and I think in it's next iteration it'll hopefully improve to suit people who get overwhelmed easily.
From one user perspective.
There's opinion. And there's more informed opinion.
This kind of argument is pointless and I'm always trying to not get caught by the UKC forum style. I shouldn't pick on every incorrect pointless nuance because you're going to come back and do it again.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I brought this up ages ago. Those who are resisting don't know what they are talking about. I have built these things in the past.

PHPBB is ok, but vBulletin is more solid.

The problem is how easy it would be to port this db over to a new forum. Might require a bit of work.

This is prehistoric, and a bit embarrassing.

Have a look at Yorkshire Divers for fairly cutting edge forums.

In reply to macstinator:

This is what I've been saying.

Really cool that you know about YD!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Thanks for the link! Interesting...

Well, actually, I think link kindof shows what I remember, in that the "look and feel" of the forums is pretty much the same as it was 10 years ago...

..which was kind of what I was saying, really...

In reply to Jimbo W: On your last point, I agree that it works.

But there's room for improvement.

So people chill out, drink a beer or glass of wine, and wait for the survey.

In my personal experience of having worked for a number of prominent and large organisations the democratic approach often ends in tears. The end user's vision of possibility is frankly quite narrow and limited by a certain default. If products (software included) were always made or improved purely on the basis of user wants there would be little novelty in progress. Whilst user feedback is important and quite useful, it's not as necessary as having a practical vision & fresh approach to a project, which is more productive in bringing about novel exciting results.

In reply to macstinator:


Cutting edge how? There is a smooth aesthetic presentation, but the avatars, the quote with the username, the member information on the right, the share links, the member seniority, the thank you facility (and the associated date), the posting permissions guff are all redundant clutter that make me want to run a mile! I'll take the smoother aesthetics, but don't need or want any of the other stuff.

In reply to macstinator:

I hear you. I get the impression though that a complete change is never going to wash with the 'late adopters'. Some 21st century functionality would be nice though with the option for the dinosaurs to leave it as it is.

Until of course they one day stumble upon it randomly, accidentally switch it on and congratulate themselves for making their life simpler.

In reply to Jimbo W: All of that is non-standard add on crap, agreed.

But, the gallery functions are more powerful and capable.
Users can track post and replies much easier.
You can control content, and read unread posts only, for example - a very basic function.

Like it or not, some social media interaction is a good thing.

In reply to macstinator:

No different from many a forum, the FRA forums http://forum.fellrunner.org.uk/index.php are essentially the same. I'm not convinced that they are significantly better than this one, they may have one or two features that are genuinely useful (coding forums need to be able to post formatted code for example) but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

ALC

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

http://web.archive.org/liveweb/http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=362...

Looking at that, how exactly has the forum changed? We are not whinging about the books or anything else, really, but you potentially underestimate the value of this forum, and the necessity to bring it upto date.

In reply to macstinator:

I had a quick look, in what way is it cutting edge?

In reply to jonny2vests: I gotta say I think that the simplicity of the forum is a strength. I'm not interested in avatars, signatures etc that clunk up the page - it's nice not to have to scroll at super-speed to read a few one-line replies.

But it could do with being brought up to date in many ways.

In reply to Horse:


It's not, it looks fairly out the box to me.

Test the load time and it scores poorly compared to UKC as do all the other examples listed.

In reply to kwoods:


Then we're on the same sheet of music.

In reply to ebygomm:

I think these days, for most users, the differences in load times of almost any forum will be measured in milliseconds.

In reply to ebygomm:

You have to clear your browser cache to get accurate load times.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:

I'm testing via an external website

In reply to Horse:

Looks just like many other forums, complete with flashing jiggling avatars and over the top signatures in an inappropriately sized font. Plus it's excruciatingly slow to load.

In reply to Hairy Pete:

That was my impression, thought I was missing something.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Its the best forum I've ever seen. Clean, simple and civilised.
Which is more than you can say for the posters.

In reply to macstinator:


A quick look at that just shows how much harder it is to see the new text that each comment adds, in amongst all the clutter. IMO it is vastly worse.

In reply to ebygomm:

A UKC page:
http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/IdHzn87wX/http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/...

A YDScuba page:
http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/cK9v33vwb/http://www.yorkshire-divers.com/f...

In reply to higher.alpine:

Can you give an example of a "modern" forum?

In reply to Fredt:

i manage simple, one out of three aint bad surely?

In reply to Coel Hellier:

Exactly!

In reply to Jimbo W:

Looks like a job done well to me!

In reply to Coel Hellier: But if it's got tw*tty avatars and pretentious signatures a forum is better, if you were a web designer or knew about IT you'd understand.

In reply to Fredt:


Indeed. I agree. Very straightforward, easy to scan, easy to read, no prevalent icons, no having to go through multiple pages with the neat feature that keeps older posts hidden.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

ah but thats not what they want apparently. Although it isnt exactly clear what they do want just that we are dinosaurs for not getting it.

In reply to jonny2vests:


What are the supposed improvements of that one over this one?

In reply to dissonance: If you were a little more open and just tried it, then you'd understand what you're missing.

In reply to Horse:

Well, you can configure it to do the internet equivalent of speed reading. It can show you new posts only, let you know when you've been replied to, multiple quoting levels that kind of thing. You can embed media, which is clearly contentious with the UKC crowd, pictures are an unholy abomination it seems

To be honest, if UKC just added a bit more functionality to this forum, I'd be happy with that, I moved from revolution to evolution further up the thread.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Aside from speed reading (whatever that is) the other stuff just clutter the place up unnecessarily, a lack of them hardly makes UKC the "dark ages" place some would have us believe.

As to only seeing new posts only, surely we can do that already by clicking "mark as Read", when you return you only see the new stuff. Or did you mean something different?

Notifications, PITA.

In reply to dissonance:


If you're half as IT savvy as you want us to think, then you do know at least what I want because I must have said it 5 times including in the OP: I want to know when someone has replied TO ME.

If you're still struggling, print it out maybe and take it to a grown up.

In reply to Horse:

Yes, I agree, bad example. I don't want it to look like that. This is fine, just needs an RSS feed worth a damn. Have you really never heard of speed reading? Anyway, I was talking about RSS.


Yes, but why not have a setting in your profile with a default behaviour.


Preston Intermediate Trainspotting Association? Oh, Pain In The Ass. You don't have to be notified, it could just be a separate list of threads in your profile.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I know what speed reading is I was wondering what the internet equivalent was.

Default behaviour for new stuff would be useful option, but lack of is hardly dark ages.

Pain.

In reply to Horse:

In 2013, a forum which doesn't have the absolute basics is pretty rare. The UKC forum is a bit of a relic in that respect, so not dark ages, more Edwardian.


Erm. Wibble.

In reply to jonny2vests:


What actually are the basics, because I've had said UKC does the basics well, and thats all I need!

In reply to jonny2vests:

It does have that basic functionality as "mark as read", you want to access it/do it in a different way. So not a relic in that respect.

In reply to jonny2vests:


i couldnt really care what you think. You are just providing some amusement while i am trying to fix a issue which requires watching a job run for half an hour or so and then catch it at the right point to get the full error. lots of waiting time.
I could also point out that understanding user requirements isnt necessary a IT function but instead business but i doubt you would get the difference.


so your definition of archaic is not showing a list of responses with all the associated overhead (think about the db structure you would need for it) that would imply for a dubious return.

Interesting definition.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Not going to wade into any of the other stuff, and apologies if it's been said already, but the interface for the site could be improved for mobile browsers. Currently too easy to click the wrong link due to small text size and the menus don't work that well on Safari (iPhone).

Otherwise it's nice to have a simple forum without too much clutter and whatnot.

Could definitely do with some 'like' buttons for facebook though.

In reply to jonny2vests:


ermm, its still called speed reading.


it does (although admittedly it seems to get confused if you use multiple devices)


a specific implementation which requires a certain data structure. It aint stone age not to have it.


You want threading? very marmite.


evolution aint always good.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I think the site needs more tapirs. Not enough tapirs.

To be honest, looking at it as a code monkey or pixel pusher will make the site look less the cutting edge, but for the rest of us peasants it does the job.

In reply to UKC Forums:

Here's some more free advice for the UKC keyholders.

Upgrade your gallery & increase the picture resolution and filesize. It's so basic and clunky at present it's not much joy to use. There is no album feature and lots of other things.

Obviously a forum needs to be clean, but there is such a thing as being too minimal (like it's present state). I don't like user signatures or animated gif avatars either, that's clutter proper. I do like avatars, there's nothing wrong with it, they in fact help you identify other users very quickly.

The usual features of modern forum systems, such as subscribing without posting, seeing who is replying specifically to you, and daily/per post email notifications are standard fare, I've never heard of anyone complaining of these features existing in forums they use! Can't believe some here think these features add "clutter"! There's nothing wrong with it, but perhaps you're somewhere on the "spectrum"

You should also have the option of blocking posts from certain users (for me UKC has certain noisy trolls whose crap isn't worth reading for a penny).

Inline images - there is no worthy argument against this, sorry but to say it's "clutter" doesn't really float if you want to be practical, it's a normal & quite basic feature of almost every content platform today. It makes posting and looking at pics far more enjoyable. Inline embedding of YT and Vimeo videos would be very cool as well.

For posting & replying a basic inline WYSIWYG editor for quotes/italics/bold/inserting links (no colour changing though) would be fantastic.

I think it's far more practical & cost worthy to move over to a new forum system and CMS than it is to patch up your existing legacy code. Believe me, I know the pain of doing this...

Regarding importing the old posts, you can create an archive section, or just insert the content into the appropriate new sections, using a customised PHP script to transfer between two MySQL databases and swap the field names etc. I've done this several times before and it's tricky but quite possible and worth the trouble.

In reply to Horse:

These are excellently done & clean:

http://typophile.com/forum

http://forum.freelanceswitch.com/

http://www.designforums.co.uk/

jonny.

In reply to jonny2vests:

In your opinion

I think they're all pretty bad. All 3 seem to only be able to manage 1 or 2 posts on screen at the same time.

In reply to ebygomm:

Oh dear... no, in YOUR opinion! Going back to that informed opinion thing... you're dissing some of the best designed forums on the web. And to call them "bad" for not fitting on your screen, come on!! Some of the posts are quite long (duh!), and anyway you're probably looking at them on a mobile or toy Apple device?

The moral of the story: think before you post darling. I have to deal with people's opinions like yours every day. Lucky for me.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Thanks for your advice.

As I have stated above, we are carrying out a User Survey and I have included some specific questions about forum features and useability. Historically whenever we have asked these questions in the past we have usually got a thumbs up for our current system, but it has been a while since we last asked in any detail and opinions do move on.

Alan

In reply to higher.alpine:


can you get much further up your own arse?
incidently i just looked at your profile and the custom colours you chose.
Is it a cunning ploy to put people off asking you for design advice.

In reply to higher.alpine:

I particularly like how the forums overlap the righthand sidebar

http://www.ebygomm.ourownlittleworld.org/wp-content/uploads/typophile.png

In reply to dissonance: That's a bit unfair, nobody chooses to be colourblind.

In reply to John Rushby:


only if we can have owls as well. possibly turn it into a game where you can have eagle owls hunting the tapirs.


pixel pushers maybe. Many code monkeys, like me, would be more interested in the performance and simplicity of style.

In reply to dissonance: So you're suggesting everyone to be average and thick like you then? And how on earth does my choice of UKC colours reflect my ability to code and design?

Your choice of colours then really cracked me up!!!! How do you manage to read the lh menu?

Sit back down.

In reply to ebygomm: your fault for using IE8

As a web developer I'd like to volunteer to undertake these changes!

In reply to adsheff: What?! You must work for CamptoCamp! And plus in your profile you look 20yrs younger than the other guys who run/code UKC, you just can't. And you're wearing gray... are you colourblind?

In reply to higher.alpine:

I concur with ebygomm. I like the clean style of the typography site, but even that only gives half the screen width to the messages (I guess that is in keeping with typographic ethos). I think all three sites are a nightmare to navigate - I much prefer the flat architecture of UKC.


In your opinion; an opinion which appears to have total disregard for the end user of the website.

In reply to higher.alpine:


Wow, that's pretty arrogant! FWIW I agree with his opinion. The reason I like the UKC forum is it doesn't have those features you list, and because of its minimalism, very easy to read and digest:
- WYSIWYG editors are just annoying guff
- avatars utilise space that is redundant, superfluous, given the current nice user page, which mostly gives plenty of information, and I'd rather not have any on the forum message pages
- I absolutely detest inline pictures / videos, what the hell is wrong with a link
- I absolutely love the lack of block quoting, and interspersed nature of conversation, which means people dip in and out of conversations, and pick up new bits of interest
- I love the all on one page aspect, with no necessity to have multiple linked pages
- making more mobile user friendly might be good (inline videos and pictures would make this worse in my (inferior) "opinion"
- a small clickable notice up by your username informing of new photo comments, or answers to posts would be a neat improvement, but not necessary


Moral of the story... ...the customers always wrong, and the arrogant expert knows better.

In reply to higher.alpine:

average and thick? you havent thought your insults through have you?


for design i thought it was obvious. Code not so much. Although your arrogance and inability to deal with opinions not your own makes me think your code will be dodgy. All the best code monkeys consider feedback useful and hence wouldnt try to put people off giving it.
Out of curiosity what languages do you specialise in?


easily.


or what

In reply to higher.alpine:

OK, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that. However ...

The second link has paged threads, i.e. if a thread starts getting too long then you get [1][2][last] style links. All well and good except for their location: they aren't on the top of each page but on the second post on each page! See http://forum.freelanceswitch.com/topic.php?id=2437 for an example.

UKC used to allow posting without registering but I believe it became more trouble than it was worth.

At work we have per update/post email systems and they just clog up your in tray. When a project is in its main development phase the systems can send you a hundred or more emails a day, obviously you have rules to move them but it's just noise really. Maybe having a notification area at the top of the screen that shows how many of the active threads you have replied to and how many of your posts have replies might be something worth doing.

Censoring/redacting posts from certain users might make for interesting reading of threads and what would you do about quoted text?

I'd agree with you about a basic inline editor - you can already make things bold and similar but you actually need to add the html tags.

As has been stated, inline images are just going to suck up bandwidth; hot linking to images elsewhere is going to use up that person's bandwidth and they may have rules in a .htaccess file to prevent it or perhaps serve up inappropriate material.

I'm not saying that these forums couldn't/shouldn't change but they aren't that dissimilar to those you've linked to. My personal requests would be to have a responsive layout rather than tables and pagination on long threads.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:
Of course. On most forum systems the user can customise how they would like the forum displayed.

Not a biggie though

No biggie either. You can get very cheap bandwidth nowadays. A trivial feature, but to have it would be nice IMO

In reply to Hairy Pete: that's the kind of think I'm talking about having to deal with.

Your comment is fairly prattish, and completely missed the point. Why would you think I'm suggesting to copy those designs like-for-like? The template wouldn't look the same. Did you think for more than a second before posting your opinion trying to knock someone down who has useful things to say?

Use whatever intelligence you have (some I hope) to work out what the best things / improvements to the forum format are from those websites. There are many. Or don't. I don't care.

In reply to higher.alpine:

I can see why you'd like an edit function. It would save you from having to delete and repost a lot!

In reply to higher.alpine:

You missed the important bit about the pagination links - their location, it breaks UI conventions. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a similar set of links at the bottom of the page but there isn't. I don't believe that any configuration system for a forum is going to have a "put pagination links where no-one can find them" option!

ALC

In reply to ebygomm:

If you are quick and realise that you've messed up then hit the back button, do your edit, repost then delete the original. Yes it's a hack and an edit facility would be better.

ALC

In reply to Jimbo W: What for you is functional is very basic for me. I'm young and computer savvy, and I love photography and different climbing disciplines. And I understand what's functional & nice to use for me is "clutter" for you and some of the others.

Awww I give up arguing with you it's boring and you've no vision beyond the bog-standard.

No, the customer isn't always wrong. And I'm not an arrogant expert. But perhaps you're a techno-phillestine and a Luddite? That's ok, UKC will stay as you like if you vote so.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Your tone isn't really helping to convince anyone of the benefit of your ideas here...

In reply to a lakeland climber:

To whoever reckoned camptocamp was worth emulating: get your eyes tested! In fact having been back to it and drilled down in to the site I think I need to have mine tested again. The site's a mess, little or no whitespace to rest your eyes or help target user behaviour. No focus to any page.

I didn't think sites like that still existed.

ALC

In reply to ebygomm: I didn't mention edit function, but yes it would be useful especially for me

In reply to a lakeland climber: first off, how the heck do you do bold and italics in UKC???

And FFS look at what they're trying to do. I guess I'm more into form AND function. I praised that site because it has many useful features. The template does need improving I agree. I was using the map function this morning, it's great to have a nice large map format, rather than the dingy little map on UKC.

In reply to higher.alpine:
it's really not difficult

In reply to higher.alpine:


I'm not a customer though, I just use ukc for free.

Personally I think the present layout is much clearer than most forums, it might be nice to have photos in the threads, but I'm not sure. If they are on your photo album they show up in the threads if you put a link to them in your post which is nearly as handy.

In reply to Tall Clare: aww you tease

In reply to Tall Clare: ou can even underline if you want to!

In reply to higher.alpine:
Thanks for the personal insult, although I note I'm not the only one to receive the benefit of your 15 years of wisdom.

Perhaps if you weren't so arrogant you wouldn't have to "deal" with such criticisms "every day".

In reply to Tall Clare:
Yes your high and mightiness. I don't think my tone matters one bit at the end of the day. BUT to have an opinion is one thing but to say someone is outright wrong when there is so much in the details & to attack another for your differences in opinion without being very friendly is another thing, and I like to challenge. Maybe it's pointless & unfruitful to engage with people who can't be civilised, but then we're all guilty of that, including yourself.

In reply to higher.alpine:


So, by implication I'm not young, amn't computer savvy, and am possibly also a philistine and luddite! You do your cause no end of good. FWIW, I do, perhaps naively, consider myself young, pretty computer savvy (though never been much interested in coding, more into hardware, electronics and operating systems), I certainly love aesthetics and photography, and love basic websites that show these things well, agreeing that there is room for improvement in the gallery aspect here too (I'd love a database of high resolution images that for users who don't mind, might be made available for desktop backgrounds):
http://www.microscopyu.com/smallworld/gallery/contests/2012/index.html

I just don't, again in my opinion, enjoy media or feature heavy fora, to enhance what is really just conversation.

In reply to higher.alpine:
I thought you said you were computer savvy?

:-P

In reply to higher.alpine:

You're telling people they're stupid just because they don't agree with you.

In reply to Alyson:



a true web guru no less

In reply to higher.alpine:

Erm... you're the one who's been patronising (darling) and insulting (average and thick, high and mighty) just because people disagree with you. Everyone else has been very civilised in comparison!

In reply to higher.alpine:

Is that a rhetorical question? (I see you've already had several sarcastic replies). If not then I've already stated how it's done. It's clunky rather than clicky!

ALC

In reply to dissonance:

I'm resisting the urge to demonstrate how to bypass the swear filter

Wastwater

In reply to Jimbo W: A valid opinion. Sorry no malice intended.

"by implication"...

To say C2C has good features doesn't imply UKC should copy everything about C2C.

To say some forums are good examples doesn't imply that UKC should copy their templates 1-1, just look at their features at least.

To add extra features in the right way to UKC doesn't imply you will get confused and have to top yourself.

To change the forum software doesn't imply you won't ever be able to use the UKC forums and that you would suffer incurable clinical depression.

To point out ill-formed comments doesn't imply the messenger is completely wrong.

In reply to higher.alpine:


And yet, what you are arguing for *is* the bog-standard, it is what you get with the off-the-shelf packages. You seem to think that many UKC users are luddites who are unaware of what's out there -- I suspect that most of us are indeed familiar with many other forums, and thus the fact that we like this one counts for something.


So how about you link to a site that is genuinely better than this one all round? If what you're saying is true, there must be loads of them ...

In reply to higher.alpine:
thanks for comments & posting some examples.
But...

using a netbook with a 10" screen, I can only see between 3 and 6 topis titles and one or two posts. I read quickly and would hate to be scrolling continually. The typophile site seems to have two-inch margins on each side! As bad as 'live for the outdoors' site.

Something like reddit works for me, because it's the *words* I want, pictures and stuff popping out is OK, but not full screen - i don't need/want to see all of some pics: if it's of interest, i'd rather click on it to open bigger or in another tab.

Avatars are just showing off, IMHO Can't really see the point of them (unless it incorporates a security feature to stop impersonations).

Your examples are useful, so we can see what else is out there, even if it's carp

Here we go. The little UKC kiddie brigade has come out to play and say silly stupid things again. Maybe UKC should clean itself of you guys rather than it's code? I think so

In reply to higher.alpine:

Beautifully ironic

In reply to dissonance:

Ooh, get you!

Ps: Derwentw­ater!

In reply to deepsoup:


WTF I don't understand....?! ....philistine luddite speaking. Can someone put me out of my misery!

In reply to higher.alpine:
I'm genuinely intrigued as to whether you are this condescending to your customers as you are to people on here?

Things can always be improved, but I've seen a lot, lot worse than this (free, and very popular) forum.

In reply to higher.alpine: You really are a charmer aren't you...you know that ignore waste of space poster feature you suggested, suddenly I see the use of it.

In reply to Jimbo W:

bypassing the swearing filter, normally it would pick up on the tw*t part of the word and not allow you to use it.

In reply to higher.alpine:

You might have some very good point's but you're not exactly winning hearts and minds.

Also be careful of writing of the unwashed of UKC there are some like Dominion who have been meddling with these Babbage Calculating Machines since you were a pixel in your dad's pants

In reply to Jimbo W:

Derwentw­ater?

I genuinely don't know how I did that!

In reply to Jimbo W:
Sorry, just me being silly.
Lame UKC specific joke, based on the anti-sweary filter not letting you write the words "Derwentw*ter" or "Wastw*ter" because they contain "tw*t".
(Oddly though, "Scunthorpe" is allowed.

In reply to higher.alpine:

I don't know who you are, but you come across a spoilt child, hope you are better with your clients (if you actually have any)

For some reason the way rockstoned comes across makes me think of Scunthorpe

I wonder what his clients/colleagues think

In reply to higher.alpine:

Here's a scenario that combines two of your "why doesn't UKC do ...", namely unregistered posting and inline images:

An spammer sets his bot trawling the net looking for open forums, finds UKC and posts indecent material. Now UKC has users from 82 to 12 years old, do you really want 82yr olds looking at hardcore porn? As for the rest of us, currently UKC slips under most work place filtering systems so we can lurk on here while pretending to work. With inline images and unregistered posting with links to widely blacklisted sites that would soon change.

Still think it's a good idea?

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:

Pmsl! Nicely done, I missed it the first time.

In reply to a lakeland climber:

I've seen posts recently from unregistered users. Maybe it's only specific forums though as it wouldn't let me just now.

In reply to all:

Please can we try and keep the debate on the points of discussion rather than turning it to personal insults. There is some useful and interesting debate going on here but it is in danger of being lost amongst petty point-scoring and personal stuff.

Thanks

Alan

Some points of information that might be useful:

Unregistered Posting
You can still post unregistered on the Starting Out, BMC, Running, Skiing and Lost and Found forums. These have been left more open to encourage more traffic, and to allow people who find stuff to post without creating and account.

Formatting Posts
Information on this is here http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/info/tips.html

Bandwidth
Bandwidth may be cheap but at the level we use it comes in huge chunks, not small increments. We are running close to our limit for our current allocation and embedding media in posts would certainly push us into the next bracket, significantly increasing our bandwidth costs. There may well be cheaper providers but we have a long-standing relationship with Rackspace which gives us more than just bandwidth. Shifting the whole site would cost a fortune anyway to probably get a worse overall service. It simply isn't an option at the moment having just been through two major server changes over the last few years while we haven't been "moving with the times" (yes, I did take offence to that one), I am not about to shell out to do it again.

Editing Posts
As some have mentioned, you can remove and repost if you are quick enough. After that we don't allow editing of posts, the main reason being so that people can't post rubbish, wait for a response, then edit their initial post. I know there are systems in OTS forums which allow editing whilst maintaining the integrity of the original message. We could maybe look at something like that but it would be better if people read what they planned to post before posting it really.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Heaven forfend! You'll be asking us to behave like reasonable human beings with respect for opinions that differ from our own next...

T.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Are you new here?
That almost sounds like it could be UCK's 'mission statement'.

In reply to higher.alpine:

That one appears to be swamped with spam.

In reply to tony:

not to mention that it looks awful.
If UKC looked like that i would not bother reading it.

In reply to jonny2vests: If it meant this forum and the gallery catching up with the 21st century, then I'd happily pay a small subscription to cover bandwidth and opperating costs.

In reply to stroppygob:

i doubt if many would join you. pay for a degraded version of what is currently free?

no thanks.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Of all the stuff on the thread you choose to take offence at that comment by me, which was made in relation to the "look and feel" of the forums, which - as you noted - is the same as it was ten years ago, and hence could actually be said to be one of the more-or-less factually correct comments on this thread?

Remember that users can't see server changes, or all the other things that you may be doing in the background (shelling out for extra bandwidth, etc) - its totally transparant to the user - they can't see it at all! But they may well be irritated by not being about to browse convieniently on their mobile phone. That's - amongst other things - the "moving with the times" that I'm referring to. Ten years ago using the internet on a small screen was unknown, now its the most common way of accessing the internet.

If you are taking offence to that then, well, there's not exactly much I can say.

I appreciate that

a) This site is your baby and
b) I don't pay to use it

but I think you are being a little more offended by a comment regarding "moving with the times" than you need to be, sorry.

In reply to jonny2vests:

I hsve to say I like the forum the way it is.

The design is simple, clean and works. Theres little advertising, no annoying signatures or flashing gifs.

It also gets past my work net nanny.

The site displays well on a tablet, although a little small on a phone, still perfectly useable.

And of course its free to use.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Well it would only be "degraded" in the eyes of the "I cannot cope with change" Luddite type personalities here, I should imagine that most of us are used to more modern forum software, and could cope with, and enjoy, a new board without bursting into tears.

The fact that you are too tight to put your hand in your pocket to use this facility speaks volumes

In reply to stroppygob:


you seem to be confusing preferring a tool designed to do one job well with being luddite.


you seem to have missed the point.

In reply to stroppygob:

Can someone find an example of what, other than UKC, they regard as a decent forum please.... ....I mean here are some forums I use in areas of my other interests:

Hifi forums:
http://www.whathifi.com/forum
http://www.avforums.com/forums/hi-fi-systems-separates/
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/forumdisplay.php?22-2-Channel-Debate&s=0adca2...

Overclocking:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=29

Music forum:
http://forum.musicradar.com/showthread.php?124495-Might-have-a-go-on-some-E...

Homebuilding:
http://www.ebuild.co.uk/
http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/forum114/

And, here is a random list of other forums that I've found after a google search for debating forums:
http://www.ukdebate.co.uk/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=92d35967f9e15f1c90edde...
http://www.secularcafe.org/forumdisplay.php?s=7d120c51972bfd71b2706f29b680a...
http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-partisan-politics-and-political-platforms/
http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/36.aspx

Also, a really big student forum:
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=54

....because not a single one these gets close to UKC (in my opinion). Which bits of these forums (or please offer any other examples you find are excellent) am I not "getting" that makes my a luddite?! Do tell!

In reply to stroppygob:

Oh, and here's another one I use:
http://thesession.org/discussions/new

Its pretty low volume forum compared to most, and has a very simple stripped down nature, even more so than UKC, but it suits the site, and in particular the coordination around the tunes etc. However, for me, the site needs to feel more structured, with smaller fonts, and more threads per page listed downwards. Nevertheless, its very different to all the others I've listed before, and has had a loyal and steadily increasing international usage.

In reply to dissonance:


No, I am pointing out that a point blank refusal to change a tool, when newer better, more efficient, ones exist, purely out of a "I like / am used to this one" attitude is Luddite.

In reply to stroppygob:

But that's not what people are saying, is it? There is no point blank refusal to change. Things that would.enhance the experience, like a button to go to the end of long threads without scrolling, fine. The addition if the little thumbnail when you scroll over a photo link was a great idea.

Things that would significantly change the look or feel of the site, like avatars or embedded media, no thanks. As many people have pointed out, it is precisely because ukc doesn't have these features that many of us enjoy using it. Of course it is a matter of personal taste, but you appear to be another person confusing having a different opinion with being wrong....


Cheers
Gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Ps sometimes there is no need for major changes to something, as it is already so good...

Eg ice cream- you can't improve on a good quality vanilla, all these sickly Ben and jerry variants are gimmicky and ultimately unsatisfying

Crisps- there are only 3 flavours, and we all know what they are. All the others, from roast chicken to worcestershire sauce are frankly bizarre, even perverted...

Lasagne- only the beef ones are any good. The vegetable and horse variants are clearly inferior...


Cheers
Gregor

In reply to stroppygob: Stop teasing us and post some links to forums you prefer.

In reply to balmybaldwin:

+1

In reply to stroppygob:

No-one is saying that the forums shouldn't change just that the examples of what is being presented as better are anything but. There are features available on turnkey forums that aren't on UKC but are they needed for this site? Like most who've been posting on this thread I use a lot of forums and other than the cases I've mentioned in earlier posts I can't think of any feature that these forums are missing.

OK, make a business case for any changes or new features you'd like to see. You need to state why the feature would improve the usability of the site for the majority of users, i.e. the benefits. You also should outline the risks and potential costs of introducing each feature. Don't focus on technical or implementation details.

ALC

In reply to jonny2vests: I really like this forum, I understand the layout and I can use it. I am completely inexperienced with forums, I do not use any others and didn't know abuot forums until this one.

That said I ahve looked at a couple of others and I have found them less obvious (possibly becuase I am used to this one). The feature that I would most like is one that tells me if someone has replied to a thread I started or a post I posted.

One thing that would irritate me and reduce my traffic is a potential inability to see it at work.

Of note for you UKC people I have a different representation of the site at work which I am sure is becuase of NHS computer systems in some way. I do not get a nice pretty user interface like normal but rather a list of hyper links in blue on the left and the links to forum posts on the forum pages lack the indentifying icon that says which forum it is in.

I would not want to risk increased spamming, I am not afraid of new features and would happily get used to them I imagine but I would not want to lose out for those new features.

Just my two penneth.

In reply to stroppygob:


And we're saying that if we like this tool more than the supposedly "better" ones, then the "better" ones aren't actually better.

Again, the presumption is that those who like UKC are simply unfamiliar with anything else. I seriously doubt that this is correct; for example I've been using the internet since the late 1980s and am familiar with many of the common user-interfaces that abound.

As just one example, on most of the out-of-the-box forums I find it much harder to see what threads are "active", because they don't have the time-ordered leader board of UKC. That feature of UKC makes it much better than most of the "better more modern" alternatives. Forums where you have to look at dates and numbers of replies to figure out what is active are much worse.

I do think that an additional "forum", which gives a user a leader-board of all the threads that they have posted on, would be a good addition, but I'd be against any radical change.

In reply to jonny2vests:

If it isn't broken then don't try fix it, and imo these forums aren't broken. I find it to be the most user friendly forum interface of all the forums I've used.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

That's an interesting idea and probably one that isn't too hard to implement.

Maybe also an option to add threads of interest, not just ones which you had posted on, to that forum as well?

Of course we are getting close to the current user options where you can filter out certain forums from your set on Forums Latest.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Any thoughts on the idea of being able to 'tag' crags and routes in threads so that when you look at the crag or route page in the database, you can see all the threads where it's been discussed? Strikes me as a genuinely useful tool - obviously others may/will disagree.

In reply to Coel Hellier:


depending how much info you want you already get the recent postings on your profile.

In reply to CJD:

Not a bad idea...

Though would you really want links to a million and one 'TPS is E0' threads...?

In reply to dissonance:


Yes, but not in a leader-board format that shows you what is active.

In reply to higher.alpine: No idea what you're on about!

In reply to jonny2vests:

Not gonna bother with the previous 288 posts, but it's a "NO" from me on this one. Adding conversations to each individual post is horrible.

In reply to jonny2vests: I really enjoy the site as is, that said, an update might be nice especially with embedded pictures.

A mobile site would be what I'd really really want. However, life goes on without it, for a free site I really can't complain.

In reply to higher.alpine:

Agree


Can't stand em. The joke of them soon wears off. Anyway, I identify users quickly - by their usernames. If UKC does end up with them I hope it is with an avatars on or off choice (unlikely).


Yes, I am keen on that,. There are a substantial minority whose stuff I don't want to read or even scroll past.

But anyway, sooner simple and clean as it is than loads of fancy clutter junk (in my subjective opinion of course)

In reply to MJH:

+1

In reply to Alyson:

That usually happens much later in the pregnancy...

In reply to ericinbristol: Ha! Another thing to look forward to.

So far I've gone through: insane tiredness, feeling pukey, random pains and unstoppable cheddar consumption.

In reply to Alyson:

whereas it is my unstoppable consumption of Cheddar routes that explains, my insane tiredness, pukiness and random pains.