• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Architecht

  • Boards Title
    We apologise again for the fault in the moderation.
  • Birthday October 3

Personal Information

Recent Profile Visitors

3,444 profile views
  1. Less scrolling to get to new posts has been a hot button issue for quite a while and has been often requested in the past. This was an easy change. Easy to do, easy to test, easy to put back. Doing experiments on board organization is how we improve things. I took actions based on my judgement, and limited feedback. When people don't respond much one way or the other after a couple of weeks, we have a few choices: Leave the feedback thread up for a while longer Forget the change Make the change and see how it works out Which we choose to do depends on how sensible the change seems, and how risky it seems to try it. In this case, it makes good sense, opens up room to highlight other threads without stickying crazy numbers of threads to the top, and is easy to undo. In the meantime, performance is a different scale of issue that isn't comparable in terms who or what it takes to address. It's a little like saying we should stop brushing our teeth until we get our clogged arteries fixed. Yes, the clogged arteries are a priority, but we should still practice good hygiene since it doesn't impact how we fix the clogged arteries one way or the other. Performance is being addressed, but it's entangled with some of the rest of the technical infrastructure. The board software vendor wants us to arrange things in ways that are convenient for them, but worse in a number of ways (SEO, international performance, etc.). We're seeking better solutions, but that will take some time to work through. By the way, I'm likely to remove a bunch of these posts after this change as settled out, as we're WAY off topic for the thread, Marwood. Please try not to bundle off-topic questions into stickied threads with a particular purpose.
  2. The point would be to unsticky a number of those threads and take up less front page real-estate. What usually happens in these situations, though, is that if I make a post like this, solicit feedback, wait a few days and just do it --- it turns out that a bunch of people didn't read the thread and feel that they didn't have a chance to speak up. So often I will let some solutions co-exist to see how the community reacts over a longer period of time. If the feedback is clear and one-sided, I'll make the change quickly. If it's sparse and/or controversial, I'll leave it a while to see how things play out.
  3. Whoops! Let me make sure I'm not giving the wrong impression. We are NOT talking about deleting posts. No posts are planned to be deleted. When I say "Shorten the search window to 1 year" I mean that searches on the boards would only look for posts that happened within the last year. IF we replace the regular search with the Google search, then a generic search for some terms would actually search everything, all the way back to the beginning of the boards. It's only the "Advanced Search" in that situation (the function built into the boards) that would be limited to 1 year.
  4. UPDATE: I see what you mean. It's not just search results, but the ability to even see a sub-forum as an options. I've duplicated this on two other instances of the boards, and filed it as a ticket with the software maker. -- SNIP -- THE BELOW IS TRUE, it just isn't directly applicable to the above question. Leaving it here for informational purposes, but the actual answer to this specific issue is above. We've been watching this as well. Usage on the boards has been going up since we first migrated, and it's putting load on the system. At the same time, we have the search history window set to 4 years. That's greater than the 1 year recommended by the boards software makers, and they warn of performance problems for large search windows on big boards -- which the CGC board is. However, 4 years is still far short of complete searchability, which is an important value of the boards given how many great conversations have occurred over many years on these boards. So, we have a few choices we are evaluating for dealing with this: Shorten the search window to 1 year as recommended to us, and just live with the limitation. Implement a plugin that replaces the Search All function with Google results This would allow searching of the complete history It only works for "search all", not for specific searches by author name, in a certain forum, etc. Leave the search window large and just live with the fact that we may not be able to improve performance Wait for some vaguely promised "Search Enhancements" that the software maker has hinted at several times Spend more money on the boards hardware and hope that improves the issue (note: more hardware does not always directly improve specific performance issues) Right now we're considering a combination - i.e.: Cut the search window to one year Implement the google search replacement for "search all" Upgrade the hardware / hosting for better performance This isn't ideal, as it would still mean that specific searches via advanced search would only go back a year. I think it also means that the list of posts by a board member on their profile page would also be limited to 1 year. It MAY also mean that searches of your private message inbox are limited to one year - I'm not sure on that one. It would be great if the software maker suddenly improved search so we wouldn't have to make compromises, but they have given no timeline or specifics on that, so I'm not holding my breath. P.S. we are testing the google search replacement on the PMG boards right now if anyone would like to see what that looks like:
  5. Hi all, I thought it might be cool to make a single thread as an index of all of the ongoing contribute-forever kind of threads FROM COMICS GENERAL ONLY so people could find those cool gems. Some of them are pinned to the top, but definitely not all - there wouldn't be room! I'm thinking that each forum could have a thread like this that gets pinned, and that might save some room at the top, while making space for more cool threads like these to be featured. I was hoping everyone could help me track them down. This is specifically for the "infinite" threads that everyone can keep adding to - as opposed to, for example, a super helpful FAQ but that is not continuously contributed to. Here are the first few:
  6. Anyone bought from all_things_comics?

    @ditko67, read this post and follow the instructions:.
  7. Well, maybe... but everyone here was once not here, and then they were new. This process could help grow the community. Yes, an influx of new members always means sorting out the reliable from the unreliable, but I wouldn't say that's a bad thing. If a particular seller doesn't like the take a risk on new members, they could always just choose not to work with them until they have an established kudos thread?
  8. Hi all, Please check out this feedback post for a possible rules clarification for the marketplace. Thanks!
  9. Hi all, This came up on a recently moderated post, and I wanted to get some feedback from the membership on this. The Background: When we first offered a marketplace on the boards, people loved it because it was used as a way for community members who trust each other and trust each other's grading to buy and sell books with each other. Often those posts were even board-specific offers, meaning that because of the trust, the community, and the low hassle process the books were offered at a better price than elsewhere. As the marketplace became more popular, people started advertising their eBay sales on the boards. This was a good idea, but it created a kind of annoying situation where people were just looking through the same books they just finished reviewing on eBay, but on the boards. That was when we decided to implement the boards-only rule. It helps the community stay focused on selling to each other, and prevents the double-review issue above. The Situation: Someone posts a selling thread on the boards, and then cross-posts that thread to other social media (facebook, instagram, whatever) -- maybe even specifying that you must be contact the seller through the boards to buy the book, requiring the buyer be a board member. The Question: Does the above situation stay true to the spirit of boards-only offers? Even if it CAN be true to the spirit, if we allow this, does it become a problem if abused? I think that when posted to social media like Instagram, it's not quite the same as a true selling offer like eBay. It's also less likely that people are reviewing Instagram for books to purchase, and more likely that people will be encouraging new members to sign up to the boards from their social network. Possible Results: We will choose to either add an amendment to the rules to allow this kind of thing (with whatever stipulations), or disallow it based on a combination of admin opinion and your feedback. Thanks! Please feel free to vote AND comment on the reasons for your vote.
  10. Albums in the galleries

    Glad you like it! I don't see a way to sort the light box. It's possible that you could "pin" all of the gallery entries in a particular order to force a sort, but I haven't experimented with that. I do know this is an area that got some features and fixes in the last boards release, so the boards software makers are paying attention to that area. Perhaps they'll add that as a feature in an upcoming release.
  12. Hi! I noticed that too. You can no longer make a post and have it automatically also become a calendar entry. If you want both a post and a calendar entry, you have to do them separately. Sorry about that.
  13. What Happened to Date Joined?

    The plugins that we used to show join date next to posts (it's not part of the core features) were recently updated to work with this newest version of the boards. So, I installed the update and it's back!
  14. IS that the space between the first and second post? I'm guessing you are running ad blocker.
  15. You can go back four years. The new boards suggests that we limit it to one year to prevent big performance hits from deep searches, but knowing how important the search function is to our content, we set it for four years. I'd really prefer it to be ALL of the content, but that apparently can be a problem. However, there is this work around. You can use google to search the site content this way: