✎ Public Voice
Out of context: Reply #77
- Started
- Last post
- 121 Responses
- mg330
Also, in the other thread about this, we talked about organizing around topic groups. Can't remember what the consensus was on that, but I do remember that it created two different scenarios:
1) Arranged by threads as QBN currently works - with some threads expected to be gigantic and always growing (Gif OTC, COTD, What are you listening to, etc.)
2) Arranged by topic groups (ex: Web Design, Print Design, Help Needed, Photography, Music, etc.) - There's a benefit to this approach in that some things important to the person posting them (looking for help on something, for example) get lost in threads that grow in length, and only allow for comments to the right.However, there's a gray area when it comes to how we all expect some of the larger threads to work. I wouldn't expect people to post gifs as individual new threads - same for now listening, COTD, etc. Those work effectively as always growing threads.
Certain topics will lend better to users replying directly below the original post, like we do for many threads. A request for help, for example, follows a flow where the user posts their request, and people post replies to it, images, etc. and don't have to rely on just the comments tool for their message.
Just thinking through this in my head at the tail end of a boring meeting.
I could see a benefit to having some sort of hybrid forum structure as follows:
Topics + Individual threads - (open a topic, view infinite threads within sort of like we currently do). People are free to post relevant threads within a topic.
Topics that are a single thread - Visually represented similar to a Topic, but opens a single thread in which users can only add replies to that thread, and comments to individual replies. This works for the bigger threads, keeps people contained within them.Like I said, just some thoughts.