LastDodo site & app/Recent posts36 messages

Ik heb geen speciale wensen m.b.t. het forum. Maar ik ben het wel met pegag eens. Waarom zou je er iets aan veranderen? Hoe lang is recent? De krant van gisteren is ook oud nieuws, en je kunt niet verwachten dat iedereen elke dag inlogt, en zelfs dan kun je al te laat zijn en staat zo’n “recent” bericht, reeds op pagina 2.

Ik ga zelf altijd via het forum naar de LD catalogus, maar soms als ik een weekje met vakantie geweest ben, zonder computer of iets dergelijks, moet ik wel meerdere pagina’s terug om te kijken of ik niets belangrijks gemist heb.

Kortom, een forum is dynamisch, en als je perse op de hoogte wilt blijven van “recente” ontwikkelingen, moet je gewoon ieder uur langs, en dat doet lang niet iedereen, en zal dat in de toekomst ook niet doen, wat je er ook eraan veranderd.   

I have no special wishes regarding the forum. But I do agree with Pegag. Why would you change anything about it? How long is recent? Yesterday's newspaper is also old news, and you can't expect everyone to log in every day, and even then you can be too late and such a "recent" message is already on page 2.

I always go to the LD catalog via the forum, but sometimes when I've been on vacation for a week, without a computer or something like that, I have to go back several pages to see if I haven't missed anything important.

In short, a forum is dynamic, and if you really want to keep abreast of "recent" developments, you just have to visit every hour, and not everyone does that, and will not do so in the future, whatever you do there. changed to it.

I really like the current forum.
My route is always via 'Recent posts in all forums'.

I only miss information if I haven't checked the forum for a while.

I take it for granted that I also see forum posts in sections that do not interest me or that interest me less.

I also agree with the current design

The only thing that sometimes bothers (and that is on every forum) is that after a while there are a lot of threads and the overview is gone.

Perhaps it makes sense to gradually delete discussions or questions that are no longer relevant. But that seems like a terrible job that can only be done by humans.

One possibility is to attach a "best before date" to a thread of, for example, 3 months from a certain moment, so that it disappears automatically. Then you might still be able to give a moderator the opportunity to indicate meaningful threads behind the scenes so that they remain.

@JozefK that is one reason why I cited that idea (archive). Discarding is an eternal waste ... Often the old topics still have information that you sometimes find desirable, or that explain things better. And hopefully the search engine will also remain intact, if you are looking for something that has been answered 'once' ...

The 'recent messages' section is of course always the 'real trigger'. You should not filter it by subject (only a 'best before date' of 2 weeks or something is a personal preference ... read it up) I assume that you often do 1 x p. 2 weeks once explodes ... (then I find older things less important ehh voila .. in an archive) ..

It is also often the case (given the recent messages ...) that more and more, especially the technology (mobile, browser and underlying) determines which way a site ultimately goes. Bootstrapping (and also so-called responsive styling) is nice ... but also boring ... a simple example is just ... just surf around ... how many sites actually don't look alike? (left there picture or color).

Discarding is an eternal waste ... Often the old topics still have info,

Threads to change things (and are modified), threads to delete things (and have been removed), threads to ask what something is worth (and are closed), ... and it would clean up quite a bit.

What I would still like is the order of messages. As in the outline, the last message is at the top, which is easy.

But if I click a thread to reply, I get to the beginning, have to scroll or go to next pages to see the last message I want to reply to. That order could also be reversed, as is the case in the overview.

I also agree with the current design

Agree, (innovation is often not an improvement either)

@Lyonesse

Your post would have fit better in this topic here.

If you want to send people a message / question, you can do this by clicking on someone's Nickname.
If you want to show that you are responding to someone else's post on the forum, it is common to do this using copy the @ sign or a partial copy of that message and mark it as a quote (button ", at the top of the message screen).

I personally think it has to do with Programming.

It seems more like something that may have been agreed with the administrators. Can / would the administrators provide some background information about this?

No, it has never been agreed to present it that way. That's part of the new page layout. I think it has to do with the fact that singles only have 2 tracks: an A and B. There is an agreement that singles and 78 rpm records will not include a number. So only A and B and no A 1 and B 1. With all other carriers (which have more tracks per side) numbers are entered.