Talking Tropics Forum Format for 2006

[SouthFloridawx]

Also I know this is a bit much but, if you could put the date the thread was locked beside the link of the locked thread that might give people an idea of when the search for what they are looking for.

Edit: Only for t.d./tropical storm/hurricane/recon and other important threads, not for all threads that are locked and new one's started.

[HurryKane]

Did you all realize that when you do a search for something specific, it gives you the thread it's in. If the thread is 47 pages long, you have to look through all 47 pages to find what you're looking for.

There's an option under search to have it return a list of individual posts instead of a whole topic thread.

[southerngale]

Did you all realize that when you do a search for something specific, it gives you the thread it's in. If the thread is 47 pages long, you have to look through all 47 pages to find what you're looking for.

There's an option under search to have it return a list of individual posts instead of a whole topic thread.

I had never done that. Laziness...just did what I knew worked.

The search feature is much better than I thought and I already used it a lot. I'm gonna have a field day now!
You learn something new every day...thanks!

[HurryKane]

Anytime. Once I found out about the posts option I never looked back. I'd love it if it were the default option--you can always get to the thread from the individual post once you've clicked on the individual post.

[KWT]

I don't minds these new rules at all!

But really, 10 pages will go in no time at all when you get the biggies. I know being a mod over on Net-weather that even 20 pages can be gone in just an 1hr during the busy winter periods, I suspect this site is going to be exactly the same. Still I do think you have to put a limit on it somewhere, but personally I think 10 pages is to small, 20 pages IMO is better just to stop us from getting into the position where a new thread is opened every hour or so, at least thats what I experianced.
Thumbnails are a great idea, though I couldn't care elss as I'm on broadband anyway.

[therock1811]

Had a thought about the images.

Wouldn't it also help to delete the images from old posts in the weather forums, like 2004 and back and replace those with links? Just a thought.

[senorpepr]

Had a thought about the images.

Wouldn't it also help to delete the images from old posts in the weather forums, like 2004 and back and replace those with links? Just a thought.

That really wouldn't help.

The images aren't on the server, plus they are hardly looked at.

The problem with the images are LARGE images.

Large images take longer to load, especially when the every Tom, Dick, and Harry is loading up the thread, thus loading up the exact same image. While this alone doesn't hurt the server, a lot of people tend to mash the refresh button because the page is slow to load--thanks to the large graphic. This refresh mashing causes the server issue.

However, the main issue with large images is... the size of them. A small graphics aren't a problem, but when people post those large NRL images, it creates a scroll problem. Simply said, when a person posts large images, they aren't being courteous. Instead of posting a large image, post a thumbnail instead that links to the larger image -- or -- just post a link.

See, images are critical for the weather field, but posting sensible images in regards to size is also critical.

Also... think about the folks on dial up or the folks who have download quotas.

[Recurve]

Sounds like sensible rules to keep the board working great.

I really like thumbnails, wide horizontal images were bad.

10 pages might be too low, but I'm sure you can adjust as the season progresses.

It would be great if the first message in the new thread has links to the previous threads, as mentioned above.

Thanks MODS and admins, keep up the great work.

(You might want to make a new post in light of what's been decided as a result of this discussion, lock it and sticky it.)

[senorpepr]

I'm sure the admin and moderators will discuss this topic, especially after Monica. The idea is that every post has to load in a thread whenever it is opened. In the heart of the season, a 100-page thread will put a lot of stress on the server, especially when a ton of people are opening it and mashing the refresh button. Furthermore, after 10-pages, the bulk of the information in that thread is old and isn't needed anymore.

In the Monica thread, it was mentioned that it isn't effective in terms of organization, but that's not really true either. The information in the locked threads are old, so it's not that bad if it falls to the second page. Plus... the first post of each thread has links to the other threads and there is a search feature.

[WindRunner]

Plus... the first post of each thread has links to the other threads and there is a search feature.

I see . . . there are. Hadn't had time to go back and look at the first pages of those threads yet. Guess those'll work for those coming back and browsing after being out for a few hours (or minutes, depending on the situation )

[Scorpion]

I don't think many people here are on dialup. I would estimate maybe 15% of the members here are on dialup. I don't think the other 85% of us should be penalized by not being able to view images.

[senorpepr]

I don't think many people here are on dialup. I would estimate maybe 15% of the members here are on dialup. I don't think the other 85% of us should be penalized by not being able to view images.

It's not about you or the broadband users... it's about the server.

Furthermore, if you happened to read the rule regarding pictures, you would have noticed that it isn't a ban on pictures. We are only asking people NOT to post HUGE images that cause the screen to scroll. Posting such images is silly. Link to it or post a thumbnail.

[wxmann_91]

I don't think many people here are on dialup. I would estimate maybe 15% of the members here are on dialup. I don't think the other 85% of us should be penalized by not being able to view images.

1) How is that a penalization?
2) At least have some consideration for the 15% minority.
3) Some of the image happy threads are killing me - and I have DSL...
4) What Senor said.

[Weatherfreak000]

The problem with the ten page rule here is that sometimes with interesting storms people post and re-post information over and over again (Interesting or not).



10 pages just aren't going to last. And it's not gonna help when people wanna try and archive check the storm's life on S2K and they have to search for all the threads.


I suggest bumping it up to about 20-25 Pages. This format will help avoid too much clutter but also it would be able to sustain more pointless posts in the topic and help sustain itself for longer then an hour.

[MiamiensisWx]

This format will help avoid too much clutter but also it would be able to sustain more pointless posts in the topic and help sustain itself for longer then an hour.

What "pointless posts"? Can you elaborate on that? Besides, do you really need to poke and shove in a good majority of some of your posts at others?

EDIT - Sorry if I sound mean, but I have the uncanny feeling that your pointed sarcasm is directed specifically to me. If it is, please stop. You CANNOT sound like that to any member.

[wxmann_91]

I suggest bumping it up to about 20-25 Pages. This format will help avoid too much clutter but also it would be able to sustain more pointless posts in the topic and help sustain itself for longer then an hour.

That I do agree with as there might be over 10-20 pages for one single storm during the main part of the season.

[MiamiensisWx]

I suggest bumping it up to about 20-25 Pages.

I also tend to agree. It sounds quite reasonable and good.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

I say 20 pages would work alot better. That would be 400 replys.

[Weatherfreak000]

This format will help avoid too much clutter but also it would be able to sustain more pointless posts in the topic and help sustain itself for longer then an hour.

What "pointless posts"? Can you elaborate on that? Besides, do you really need to poke and shove in a good majority of some of your posts at others?

EDIT - Sorry if I sound mean, but I have the uncanny feeling that your pointed sarcasm is directed specifically to me. If it is, please stop. You CANNOT sound like that to any member.

I wasn't referring to you..but lemme give an example....


Ex- "Wow that storm is amazing (in several variations from several members).


Ex 2- Multiple Sat pics of the same image from the storm from multiple members.


Ex 3- Any conversation that deviates from the topic discussion. (Such as for example a mini discussion within a hurricane topic that asks for hurricane records).



While these examples I can honestly say i'm not innocent of. I believe I can agree for myself and for others when I say they can be quite proficient in cluttering a topic.


You have to understand that i'm NOT targeting anyone CapeVerdeWave. Merely showing a point.

[MiamiensisWx]

OK, Weatherfreak000. Thanks for explaining and no harm done.