• Create Account

## What Does Everyone Think About The New Site Layout?

Old topic!

Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

487 replies to this topic

### #321davepermen  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 10:54 AM

Do you seriously believe introducing only the positive ratings would've improved the quality of posting?

Yes I do seriously believe that. Why else would you think I'm supporting it, then?

The positive only rating system worked and works in many forums. It is quite popular. It's implemented on all major forum software, and used in a lot of different communities. So I consider it proven to be good enough.
The positive only rating system leads to better posts, as it is visible in other communities.

The negative rating system implemented here lead to a lot of hating and agressive postings and bans. Saying the positive only rating system would create that, does not make much sense. I've seen the original gamedev system create a lot of chaos, too. It was not perfect, no solution to that.

What both systems have in common, is, they're good enough. They're a bit different, but serve the purpose of promoting good content good enough. Both are not perfect.

Those who think that it will fail in THIS very community think this comunity to behave different than others. Which simply is not true. We have the same useless fights (this on included), the same Ego-wars, the same ranting, trolling, banning. There's nothing special in the way this community behaves.

And this is the reason i seriously believe, the positive only rating system is good enough. Not better, but not worse, than the negative rating system.

Happy now, MikeP? (not with the content, of course, just with the way I've written it)
If that's not the help you're after then you're going to have to explain the problem better than what you have. - joanusdmentia

My Page davepermen.net | My Music on Bandcamp and on Soundcloud

### #322Josh Petrie  Moderators

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:14 AM

the negative rating lead to a lot of hating and agressive postings and bans, too. it was no perfect thing, but a good enough thing. same as positive only rating.

Nobody was ever banned due to having a negative rating. They were banned for what they posted, rating or no. I just want to make that clear.

EDIT: Except maybe nes8bit. But come on, he deserves it.

### #323davepermen  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:27 AM

the negative rating lead to a lot of hating and agressive postings and bans, too. it was no perfect thing, but a good enough thing. same as positive only rating.

Nobody was ever banned due to having a negative rating. They were banned for what they posted, rating or no. I just want to make that clear.

EDIT: Except maybe nes8bit. But come on, he deserves it.

And this is what matters, in the end. Bad behavior leads to bans, no matter what rating system. And yes, nes8bit deserved it.
If that's not the help you're after then you're going to have to explain the problem better than what you have. - joanusdmentia

My Page davepermen.net | My Music on Bandcamp and on Soundcloud

### #324Tape_Worm  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:32 AM

First impression: I like it, very slick!

The only thing that's bothering me at the moment is that the "Recent Threads"-box is so far down the frontpage. For me, it is one of the most important elements of the site. I really liked being able to see the latest discussions at a glance.

Yeah this is the only thing I'm not keen about as well. It'd be nice if we could have the layout configurable in some fashion (although I'm not entirely sure how difficult this would be to pull off).

### #325Sirisian  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:35 AM

Silly question. Rating up a single post doesn't do anything does it? I read over the small little numbers in the bottom right corner. I recommend adding a glow filter. As a post is rated up higher and higher have it begin to glow and overshadow anyone else's post.

box-shadow: 0 0 50px rgba(0, 255, 0, 1);-webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 50px rgba(0, 255, 0, 1); -moz-box-shadow: 0 0 50px rgba(0, 255, 0, 1);

On another note continue to lower the margin of everything. Still think the left part of the posts needs to be shoved up where the name is so it's all within the same section. There's enough room too. When I say lower the margins I mean on quote boxes and the bottom area separating posts. (The part above the separating bar). Also if you keep the avatars where they are at move them up further. There's like 10 pixels there. Same for the posted date and the area under it. I believe the quote boxes though could have a slimming. They have like a 15 pixel border around all the text. I'd prefer to easily be able to view tons of quotes and multiquotes within a single page. I believe that after a while with continual changes and a direct focus for minimalism that this site will become more readable.

### #326dmatter  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:46 AM

I maintain that the community should be able to indicate to someone that they are stepping outside of what the community wants.

Indeed. I realise that most of the discussion here is about the "reputation" value and the lack down-voting on that value (and I'm of the opinion that down-voting is a good thing), but it's worth mentioning that there is also a 5-star rating system on users - you could "down-vote" them a star (ok, it's not really down voting as such, but as long as it's fewer stars than they already have it'll negatively affect their average), over time this would stabilise, with unpopular users having few stars than more popular users.

. David Gill :: GitHub :: twitter .

### #327d000hg  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:51 AM

The biggest problem I have with the current system is that there is no negative feedback ability to either a) make people correct their attitude

How about, you know, telling people you don't like what they've said rather than making a cowardly down-vote where they can't even see what they did wrong?

Yeah, because that's totally effective on it's own, since everyone who even thinks about rating someone down is a coward that hasn't already voiced their distaste and gone blithely ignored.

Is there no place for a middle ground between simply ignored words and moderator action?

Being able to point out an erroneous post, at the very least, seems something worthwhile. You can hope everyone reads the thread in whole, but some threads drag long, and in my experience, not even in on the best of forums will everyone read every page. If protecting precious egos from scary negative signs is that big an issue, make it bloody opt in like help wanted.

So to be clear, taking time time to tell a user they're being offensive has no effect, but an anonymous down-rating does, when they can't even see what thread it was attached to? That says more about the community than the need for a rating system.

A middle ground from reporting to mods is that mods should be reading the forums and can let posters know when they are stepping over a line.

If you want a system where people simply ask questions, and answers given can be voted up/down by the community, that's called Stack Exchange. GD is more about discussion, not right/wrong answers, and should not try to encroach on SE... all these sites work best with big communities so let GD be the titan of discussions and SE the titan of community-voted question answering.

### #328farcodev  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:52 AM

A (super-basic, really kinda ugly) dark theme is now available, and will be further developed. It'll get complex and pretty more quickly if anyone's willing to help me out with it.

my eyes thank you !
---------------------------------
FAR Colony http://farcolony.blogspot.com/

### #329phantom  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:53 AM

And this is what matters, in the end. Bad behavior leads to bans, no matter what rating system. And yes, nes8bit deserved it.

Which still doesn't allow for the 'voting down' of posts which contain bad information; as already mentioned it's all very well being able to reply with correct information however unless the poster goes back and adjusts their post that bad information is still out there; not allowing the community to down vote a post to reflect this is a large oversight.

### #330davepermen  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:58 AM

How about just waiting and se if it really is that large of an oversight, phantom?

Good posts differentiate themselves from the bad ones, as the good ones get upvoted. Bad ones don't.

It's just a numerical difference. Nothing else.
If that's not the help you're after then you're going to have to explain the problem better than what you have. - joanusdmentia

My Page davepermen.net | My Music on Bandcamp and on Soundcloud

### #331Nytegard  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:09 PM

And we know well what gdnet was like before the ratings system. Do you seriously believe introducing only the positive ratings would've improved the quality of posting? We could have the moderators issue more suspensions and bans at the expense of their time, but how is that an improvement?

Except that in general the number WASNT ignored and the introduction of the rating system was a POSITIVE step for the overall post content of this site.

As said before, the number isn't really about YOU, it's about letting everyone else encode their opinion of you into some easily viewable format. If you didn't use them or even look at them, that's fine! But if someone else wants to, why stop them? In fact, if you completely ignored them, why are you even arguing about this at all? You shouldn't care one way or the other.

Obviously, you did care about the number, but since the community held you in little regard, you aren't happy with the system. Since you guys are so keen on having everything out in the open instead of the supposedly "cowardly" use of ratings, here we go: I would rate you down for this thread alone due to your increasingly sarcastic comments, posts with little content other than mild attacks on other people, and no thought or rational arguments to back up your ideas. Apparently saying this out loud in its own post is far less disruptive than doing it quickly off to the side, so I'll try to call it out more often when I see it.

@MaulingMonkey - As I stated in a previous post, I do remember what GD was like before the rating system. Like many other sites of the day, it had a ranking based on post count. NES8Bit, Landfish, etc., would spam the site with multiple threads which contained one word, and to read the full sentence, you had to go through 8+ threads. But I think people misattribute the rating system fixing a portion of the community with another broken system (ranked by postcount) which was causing the problem.

Maybe the old rating system was positive. I personally didn't feel it was, and I know I'm not the only person who does. I'm willing to give the rest of the site a chance, after a major overhaul, and I think it's only fair to see if GDNet collapses back into the days of the old west, or stays as civil as it was during it's previous incarnation.

@Mike.Popoloski - I personally don't care about the ratings, despite what it may seem like in my previous posts (heck, half my posts are in political or religious discussions, which are guaranteed ratings killers). Unlike yourself, and other people, I don't contribute enough to the site to feel that I should be respected in one way or another. I can live with that. But I still never liked the system, as it caused a little too much bickering (as seen in this thread. Yes, I realize I'm part of the problem). Outside of a moderator issue, which has been resolved, my next clearest memory of why I don't like the system happens to deal with another user, and not myself. I respected this person, and they had a fairly decent rating before one post (It was in the mid 1300's). A post came up about World of Warcraft, and the general concensus in the thread was that WoW was for losers. This one person came on defending the game, and claimed it had some benefits. He didn't use vulgar language, he wasn't offensive in my opinion, and he tried to back up his opinion. He took over a 200 point reputation point hit.

The problem is, if you feel another person is being unjustly treated, you can either defend them, at which point, you'll take a similar ratings hit, or you can sit back and do nothing (outside of rating the person up in secret feeling they were treated wrongly). It lead to a system where one person who may have gotten rated down for one reason or another decided to take retribution and voted everyone else down who they thought voted them down. Now, you can say that maybe it wasn't them, but that's part of the problem. Several times the people admitted it with something similar to "I see you guys voted me down, so I'm going to vote X, Y, Z down because you're all *****). Other times, maybe they didn't admit it, but their vengeance in downvoting led to the same result. They may have voted down in spite people who didn't down vote them in the first place.

You stated in a previous thread that you typically would down vote people who started language debate threads. I know other people were voted down because they didn't use the search function. While this is your choice, often times you would see multiple people in the For Beginners section with sub 1000 ratings. Yes, they don't understand the general concensus of the community. But they're new! A person can't join a community with perfect knowledge of all the unspoken rules. Sure, there are FAQ's for some of them, but often times, they're not exactly in the most accessible location for people who are here for the first time. We all at one point or another made ignorant mistakes, be it in this forum, or elsewhere. There's a difference between ignorance and stupidity, and I personally don't feel it's fair to judge a person who is unaware.

While I would agree that there needs to be the ability to retract an upvote, but I don't think downvoting is helpful.

### #332Gaiiden  Senior Staff

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:12 PM

I really love the ability to now read on mobile devices. Kudos to it. I often read GameDev website on the go. The only nitpick that I would say is to have a faster way to get to the forums especially on a mobile device, because it does take awhile to load pages on the iphone4 But it is just a small issue

Check out my latest blog post and you can learn more about the mobile aspects of the website.

Yes, thank you very much but I also see 'external' blogs being replicated here. Such as Leadwerk's. Was it there before? Maybe I didn't pay attention and maybe it always have been there but... perhaps there should be some sort of separation? I don't know.

Submit that as a Feedback ticket so we don't forget this, it would be a good idea to differentiate group/company blogs until we can get them properly segregated as we plan to do to give companies their own portals here on the site.

The feedback tab on the right needs to go.... its pretty lame.

Also, I do not need to know how many post a user has (located under group). If I wanted to know this, I could look it up. I'd rather save the vertical space.
Can we move the 'vote this post up' botton to the 'footer' of the comment/post? Again, less white space in the vertical would be a good thing. Though, there is a chance if this is changed that it may not look as good as I think it would.

Edit: One more thing. With some people, the 'joined' date under their name in the forums doesn't have enough space and gets kicked down to the next line. You may need to abbreviate Months to make this fit correctly, or widen the right column/div and push everything left.

Feedback tab can't go yet - it needs to be visible and obvious for people to see and use. That said, it won't be there forever - once we clean up bugs and the submissions start to trickle down we will remove it. We also understand it can slightly overlap content in smaller resolutions and will be adjusting that as well.

I've been taking a little time to look into replacing post count with user rating but haven't found out how to do that - yet. We still have lots of style sheet tweaking to do but I agree if we can get info back up into the horizontal bars like the old site we will.

Let's just deal with the date thing for now as we'll have more space if we can get it up into the horizontal area.

Well, whatever my quota is for upvotes, it appears I'm still maxed out, even though today is ostensibly a new day. As for how many it was, well, my best guess is around a dozen, but I'm entirely sure.

I still haven't located a setting that adjusts this quota. Will continue to hunt it down as I handle other things as well.

I don't like that i have to click the drop-downs to activate them (Safari 5.0.3, OS X 10.6.6). Drop downs on the web should drop on hover, close on mouse-out.

I think the social tools were chosen a little indiscriminately (throw everything in). I think Twitter and Facebook were all that were needed; what use is a StumbleUpon badge on a GDNet forum thread?

I hate the quote boxes. They're hideous.

I dislike the new smiley tags. They complicate programmer-y stuff like enumerated lists or parenthetical expressions.

Formatting is problematic for me. Newlines in the edit box aren't properly converted into paragraphs plus vertical margin, so I have to append additional newlines.

Drop downs are broken in IE and hover-down menus are severely broken in IE, so we need to wait for IPS to release a fix before we can go back to hover-down menus.

I'm not really interested in deciding what's useful to other people or not in regards to the social buttons. I know the fact that I see them everywhere else I go doesn't mean we have to have them too, but the fact is I see them everywhere else I go and I barely notice them anymore. But that's just me.

We can definitely modify the styles of the quote boxes at some point. At least make them match the skin better - that purple is indeed pretty hideous. Since you still have your staff status, might as well dig around in the ACP and help out if you have time.

As I mentioned in my journal post, we can't turn them off globally, and they will need to be disabled on a per-post basis. I'm not saying every post you make obviously - if you notice a smiley that you didn't mean to make, you can edit the post to disable them. We'll have to put in a request for global control of this from IPS.

The newline thing is a known issue logged in our tracking system.

Silly question. Rating up a single post doesn't do anything does it? I read over the small little numbers in the bottom right corner. I recommend adding a glow filter. As a post is rated up higher and higher have it begin to glow and overshadow anyone else's post.

Actually there is supposed to be some kind of content highlighting for highly-rated posts. I've just lowered the minimum to 5 up-votes so you should notice some things now - we'll no doubt need to keep adjusting this value upwards slightly every so often as more people start up-voting things to maintain quality

Wow here's one. I liked your idea waaaaay better Sirisian Definitely some more work we need to do her.

Actually it was so useless I raised the threshold again to stave off more complaints from people until we get a better handle on highlighting highly up-voted posts. Here's a pic tho:

Drew Sikora
Executive Producer
GameDev.net

### #333way2lazy2care  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:16 PM

As said before, the number isn't really about YOU, it's about letting everyone else encode their opinion of you into some easily viewable format. If you didn't use them or even look at them, that's fine! But if someone else wants to, why stop them? In fact, if you completely ignored them, why are you even arguing about this at all? You shouldn't care one way or the other.

I am arguing about it because I think a useless feature is being replaced with a somewhat useful one and I don't want the more useful one to get cut before it's even been used. Though having my java advice's credibility questioned because I disagreed with passing the healthcare bill as it was does seem suspect to me.

How am I the only person that sees a problem in defining all of those attributes by a single value? At least the new system serves as a maximal representation of those attributes rather than a sum total of each of them.

edit: I have also reached my up vote quota as far as bugtracking goes. I'll estimate similarly that I was around 10 but no more than 15.

### #334SiCrane  Moderators

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:17 PM

@MaulingMonkey - As I stated in a previous post, I do remember what GD was like before the rating system. Like many other sites of the day, it had a ranking based on post count. NES8Bit, Landfish, etc., would spam the site with multiple threads which contained one word, and to read the full sentence, you had to go through 8+ threads. But I think people misattribute the rating system fixing a portion of the community with another broken system (ranked by postcount) which was causing the problem.

I don't think your memory is all that good. The post count ranking was removed years before last rating system was installed. For a good long stretch there was nothing available that was usable as a user ranking unless you count join date.

### #335SiCrane  Moderators

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:20 PM

I'm not saying every post you make obviously - if you notice a smiley that you didn't mean to make, you can edit the post to disable them.

Unless you do something silly - like preview the post to see if the smiley is actually removed, which resets the post options checkbox so that when you actually do submit the post the damned smiley is still there.

### #336Gaiiden  Senior Staff

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:26 PM

Unless you do something silly - like preview the post to see if the smiley is actually removed, which resets the post options checkbox so that when you actually do submit the post the damned smiley is still there.

I'll add that note to my journal entry.

Wait a minute - I just tried to replicate this behavior and failed. I went to make a new post, put in some smilies, turned them off, hit preview and they were still off, hit post and the post didn't have them on. Then I went in and did a quick edit on the post and that still didn't reset the smilies to on.

So is this a real issue in some other browser?

Drew Sikora
Executive Producer
GameDev.net

### #337Wan  Members

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:31 PM

I'm not really interested in deciding what's useful to other people or not in regards to the social buttons. I know the fact that I see them everywhere else I go doesn't mean we have to have them too, but the fact is I see them everywhere else I go and I barely notice them anymore. But that's just me.

Speaking of buttons, if find the button at the bottom of a thread a curious one. Apparently you can use it to download the raw HTML of the page?

### #338SiCrane  Moderators

Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:57 PM

So is this a real issue in some other browser?

It's happening to me in Chrome. But, it's not for new posts, it's specifically for editing an existing post.

Test:

Edit: yup, still happening.

### #339 owl   Banned

Posted 12 January 2011 - 01:15 PM

I'm not really interested in deciding what's useful to other people or not in regards to the social buttons. I know the fact that I see them everywhere else I go doesn't mean we have to have them too, but the fact is I see them everywhere else I go and I barely notice them anymore. But that's just me.

Speaking of buttons, if find the button at the bottom of a thread a curious one. Apparently you can use it to download the raw HTML of the page?

That it seems. Without CSS though.
I like the Walrus best.

### #340 owl   Banned

Posted 12 January 2011 - 01:16 PM

So is this a real issue in some other browser?

It's happening to me in Chrome. But, it's not for new posts, it's specifically for editing an existing post.

Test:

Edit: yup, still happening.

Which version? I'm using 8.0.552.224 and I haven't experienced any sort of trouble...
I like the Walrus best.

Old topic!

Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.