www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Better forums

reply "Morbid.Obesity" <Morbid.Obesity mail.com> writes:
It seems the forums are picking up a bit with newer people.

I suggest that subforums be used for specific topics or a tag 
based system like stack overflow. At some point it will get out 
of control and have to be changed... better not wait until that 
happens.

E.g., tagging could have stuff like

"Interfacing", "Java", "DLL"

or one can have subforums... tagging is nicer because it allows 
easier overlapping of subject matter rather than many independent 
sub-forums. (e.g., interfacing and java sub-forums confuse the 
issue since the above example actually requires both)

I know that nntp might be an issue, one could possibly use 

subject of a post that remains compatible but newer software can 
keep track of all the posts and allow searching using tags.

Better yet, create some bidirectional middleman between stack 
exchange and the D forums/nntp.

e.g., it will keep track and adapt D forum posts into a stack 
exchange post and vice versa.

Alternatively, and IMO the best way, simply drop backwards 
compatibility with the newsgroups and get out of the dark ages. 
If D wants to represent the future it shouldn't use neanderthal 
technologies, specially as a form of communication. We do not 
communicate in grunts because it is inefficient and there are 
better ways(english, for example... or any modern natural 
language), and therefor, we shouldn't use nntp as a form of 
communication when there are better ways.

[I'm not advocating the full logical conclusion but something a 
bit more reasonable than 'living in the dark ages(taking into 
account computer years ;) )]
Jun 17 2015
next sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 02:13:13 UTC, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 I suggest that subforums be used for specific topics or a tag 
 based system like stack overflow.


I think we should just use stack overflow for that. A forum is 
kinda chatty and not that great for searching anyway - even if 
you find something, there might be fifty posts between question 
and answer. The SO model tries to avoid that and I think we might 
as well just use it.

Remember we can ask and answer our own questions on SO too, so we 
could archive things there with that method.
Jun 17 2015
parent "Morbid.Obesity" <Morbid.Obesity mail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 02:31:15 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 02:13:13 UTC, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 I suggest that subforums be used for specific topics or a tag 
 based system like stack overflow.


 I think we should just use stack overflow for that. A forum is 
 kinda chatty and not that great for searching anyway - even if 
 you find something, there might be fifty posts between question 
 and answer. The SO model tries to avoid that and I think we 
 might as well just use it.

 Remember we can ask and answer our own questions on SO too, so 
 we could archive things there with that method.


Yes, I think the SO works, D forums comes up about half way. 
Again, D forums may work right now but at some point they won't 
assuming D takes off. The benefit of switching not, rather than 
later is that it will make the later, sooner.
Jun 17 2015
prev sibling parent reply "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 02:13:13 UTC, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 It seems the forums are picking up a bit with newer people.

 I suggest that subforums be used for specific topics or a tag 
 based system like stack overflow.


You mean the "Learn" forum? Because that form of discussion is 
only applicable there, and not for general discussion.


 At some point it will get out of control and have to be 
 changed... better not wait until that happens.


I don't know what you mean by this. I don't see how a simple 
increase in users and activity would invalidate the current 
format.


 I know that nntp might be an issue, one could possibly use 

 subject of a post that remains compatible but newer software 
 can keep track of all the posts and allow searching using tags.


I don't see what considerable advantage would be provided by 
tagging threads. Impossibility of editing will be another 
difficulty.


 Better yet, create some bidirectional middleman between stack 
 exchange and the D forums/nntp.


I don't see what this would achieve.


 Alternatively, and IMO the best way, simply drop backwards 
 compatibility with the newsgroups and get out of the dark ages.


Again, you mean just the "Learn" forum?

I'm biased, but generally speaking I think we're in a much better 
place than most other programming language communities.

For example, Rust mainly uses GitHub issues, Go uses Google 
Groups, Nim uses a (very simple) custom forum, many other have 
just mailing lists or no official forums.

We have:

- Access via NNTP, mailing lists, or web interface with 4 
different view modes
- Threading
- Mobile-friendly view (apparently not perfect but much better 
than nothing)
- Keyboard navigation
- Fast load speeds
- Open-source, self-hosted solution, no dependency on 3rd-parties

I think we have many advantages and few disadvantages compared to 
other


 If D wants to represent the future it shouldn't use neanderthal 
 technologies, specially as a form of communication. We do not 
 communicate in grunts because it is inefficient and there are 
 better ways(english, for example... or any modern natural 
 language), and therefor, we shouldn't use nntp as a form of 
 communication when there are better ways.

 [I'm not advocating the full logical conclusion but something a 
 bit more reasonable than 'living in the dark ages(taking into 
 account computer years ;) )]


Old technologies are not inherently worse. On the contrary, a 
technology's age may show its maturity and widespread support - 
consider the vast number of NNTP and mail clients you can get for 
any platform and operating system, all of which can be used to 
access this forum.
Jun 17 2015
parent reply "Morbid.Obesity" <Morbid.Obesity mail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 03:39:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 02:13:13 UTC, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 It seems the forums are picking up a bit with newer people.

 I suggest that subforums be used for specific topics or a tag 
 based system like stack overflow.


 You mean the "Learn" forum? Because that form of discussion is 
 only applicable there, and not for general discussion.


 At some point it will get out of control and have to be 
 changed... better not wait until that happens.


 I don't know what you mean by this. I don't see how a simple 
 increase in users and activity would invalidate the current 
 format.


 I know that nntp might be an issue, one could possibly use 

 subject of a post that remains compatible but newer software 
 can keep track of all the posts and allow searching using tags.


 I don't see what considerable advantage would be provided by 
 tagging threads. Impossibility of editing will be another 
 difficulty.


 Better yet, create some bidirectional middleman between stack 
 exchange and the D forums/nntp.


 I don't see what this would achieve.


 Alternatively, and IMO the best way, simply drop backwards 
 compatibility with the newsgroups and get out of the dark ages.


 Again, you mean just the "Learn" forum?

 I'm biased, but generally speaking I think we're in a much 
 better place than most other programming language communities.

 For example, Rust mainly uses GitHub issues, Go uses Google 
 Groups, Nim uses a (very simple) custom forum, many other have 
 just mailing lists or no official forums.

 We have:

 - Access via NNTP, mailing lists, or web interface with 4 
 different view modes
 - Threading
 - Mobile-friendly view (apparently not perfect but much better 
 than nothing)
 - Keyboard navigation
 - Fast load speeds
 - Open-source, self-hosted solution, no dependency on 
 3rd-parties

 I think we have many advantages and few disadvantages compared 
 to other


 If D wants to represent the future it shouldn't use 
 neanderthal technologies, specially as a form of 
 communication. We do not communicate in grunts because it is 
 inefficient and there are better ways(english, for example... 
 or any modern natural language), and therefor, we shouldn't 
 use nntp as a form of communication when there are better ways.

 [I'm not advocating the full logical conclusion but something 
 a bit more reasonable than 'living in the dark ages(taking 
 into account computer years ;) )]


 Old technologies are not inherently worse. On the contrary, a 
 technology's age may show its maturity and widespread support - 
 consider the vast number of NNTP and mail clients you can get 
 for any platform and operating system, all of which can be used 
 to access this forum.


Come on, I know you do have to think much but at least try! A 90 
your old woman is "mature" but how many 19 year old men are 
chasing after them?

Your last comment is the same as "I like to use stones to wipe my 
butt!, If it was good enough for the cavemen and seeing they 
probably did it for thousands of years until they realized leafs 
could be used, then surely it is more developed then anything 
recent like toilet paper!!!".

Simply put, the flaw in your logic is that new technology is not 
created in a vacuum, it is based on the "old way" where people 
have **learned** from there past mistakes.

Unfortunately your mentality is what prevents progress rather 
than creates it. I suppose not a bad thing, balance is important. 
Just realize I'm on the other end as you. I'd rather be a super 
human rather than a caveman. Not just because of the rock/toilet 
paper issue.

Again, with a mentality such as yours, how do you ever except to 
progress? This is a serious question, I can't ever see how it 
could get us where we are at(which may not be that great, but if 
it's better than where we were then surely it is due to 
technology. (using the stone was the first step, the left the 
second, and toilet paper the third. The bidet could be the 
fourth... Of course, super humans will have learned to absorb all 
fecal matter through a specifically evolved pouch that acts as a 
furnace. Only gas will be a problem, but I'm sure it will be only 
a matter of time before someone, not like you, figures out a 
solution for it.

Progress friend, that is what you need!
Jun 17 2015
next sibling parent "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 03:55:49 UTC, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 Progress friend, that is what you need!


You've completely misunderstood my argument. I did not mean "old 

 new", I meant that it doesn't matter if something is old or 


new, it should be judged on its own merits. Your entire reply is 
about "new > old" (but full of allegories and no actual arguments 
concerning the topic at hand).

I do not wish to get into a sentimental argument hinging on 
metaphors and allegories. If you do not wish to discuss factual 
arguments, then there is nothing to debate.
Jun 17 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Rikki Cattermole <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:
On 18/06/2015 3:55 p.m., Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 03:39:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 02:13:13 UTC, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 It seems the forums are picking up a bit with newer people.

 I suggest that subforums be used for specific topics or a tag based
 system like stack overflow.


 You mean the "Learn" forum? Because that form of discussion is only
 applicable there, and not for general discussion.


 At some point it will get out of control and have to be changed...
 better not wait until that happens.


 I don't know what you mean by this. I don't see how a simple increase
 in users and activity would invalidate the current format.


 I know that nntp might be an issue, one could possibly use something

 that remains compatible but newer software can keep track of all the
 posts and allow searching using tags.


 I don't see what considerable advantage would be provided by tagging
 threads. Impossibility of editing will be another difficulty.


 Better yet, create some bidirectional middleman between stack
 exchange and the D forums/nntp.


 I don't see what this would achieve.


 Alternatively, and IMO the best way, simply drop backwards
 compatibility with the newsgroups and get out of the dark ages.


 Again, you mean just the "Learn" forum?

 I'm biased, but generally speaking I think we're in a much better
 place than most other programming language communities.

 For example, Rust mainly uses GitHub issues, Go uses Google Groups,
 Nim uses a (very simple) custom forum, many other have just mailing
 lists or no official forums.

 We have:

 - Access via NNTP, mailing lists, or web interface with 4 different
 view modes
 - Threading
 - Mobile-friendly view (apparently not perfect but much better than
 nothing)
 - Keyboard navigation
 - Fast load speeds
 - Open-source, self-hosted solution, no dependency on 3rd-parties

 I think we have many advantages and few disadvantages compared to other


 If D wants to represent the future it shouldn't use neanderthal
 technologies, specially as a form of communication. We do not
 communicate in grunts because it is inefficient and there are better
 ways(english, for example... or any modern natural language), and
 therefor, we shouldn't use nntp as a form of communication when there
 are better ways.

 [I'm not advocating the full logical conclusion but something a bit
 more reasonable than 'living in the dark ages(taking into account
 computer years ;) )]


 Old technologies are not inherently worse. On the contrary, a
 technology's age may show its maturity and widespread support -
 consider the vast number of NNTP and mail clients you can get for any
 platform and operating system, all of which can be used to access this
 forum.


 Come on, I know you do have to think much but at least try! A 90 your
 old woman is "mature" but how many 19 year old men are chasing after them?

 Your last comment is the same as "I like to use stones to wipe my butt!,
 If it was good enough for the cavemen and seeing they probably did it
 for thousands of years until they realized leafs could be used, then
 surely it is more developed then anything recent like toilet paper!!!".

 Simply put, the flaw in your logic is that new technology is not created
 in a vacuum, it is based on the "old way" where people have **learned**
 from there past mistakes.

 Unfortunately your mentality is what prevents progress rather than
 creates it. I suppose not a bad thing, balance is important. Just
 realize I'm on the other end as you. I'd rather be a super human rather
 than a caveman. Not just because of the rock/toilet paper issue.

 Again, with a mentality such as yours, how do you ever except to
 progress? This is a serious question, I can't ever see how it could get
 us where we are at(which may not be that great, but if it's better than
 where we were then surely it is due to technology. (using the stone was
 the first step, the left the second, and toilet paper the third. The
 bidet could be the fourth... Of course, super humans will have learned
 to absorb all fecal matter through a specifically evolved pouch that
 acts as a furnace. Only gas will be a problem, but I'm sure it will be
 only a matter of time before someone, not like you, figures out a
 solution for it.

 Progress friend, that is what you need!


Actually I'm in agreement with Vladimir. NNTP as a backend system works 
rather well. And personally I was quite surprised at this.
No, we could easily add tags just prepend them as:

[GUI][Serialization] Help!!!! cannot serialize widgets data to disk

Really its just the web interface that needs to support it. NNTP clients 
will be more then happy to just search for "[GUI]".
Jun 17 2015
next sibling parent reply "Joakim" <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 Actually I'm in agreement with Vladimir. NNTP as a backend 
 system works rather well. And personally I was quite surprised 
 at this.
 No, we could easily add tags just prepend them as:

 [GUI][Serialization] Help!!!! cannot serialize widgets data to 
 disk

 Really its just the web interface that needs to support it. 
 NNTP clients will be more then happy to just search for "[GUI]".


While I access this newsgroup exclusively through the web and do 
not use the NNTP/email interfaces at all and agree that those 
backends are unnecessarily limiting the web forum, I agree with 
Vlad and Rikki that an old technology is not necessarily 
inferior.  Given the crap that's often created with new tech, it 
seems like people do not learn from the old tech at all.

I agree with Rikki that it'd be better to add features to the web 
forum in a backward-compatible way, such as putting tag names in 
the titles or using Markdown for the forum's markup, which is 
perfectly readable in email.

btw, loving the new "Save and preview" button! :)
Jun 17 2015
parent reply Rikki Cattermole <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:
On 18/06/2015 4:25 p.m., Joakim wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 Actually I'm in agreement with Vladimir. NNTP as a backend system
 works rather well. And personally I was quite surprised at this.
 No, we could easily add tags just prepend them as:

 [GUI][Serialization] Help!!!! cannot serialize widgets data to disk

 Really its just the web interface that needs to support it. NNTP
 clients will be more then happy to just search for "[GUI]".


 While I access this newsgroup exclusively through the web and do not use
 the NNTP/email interfaces at all and agree that those backends are
 unnecessarily limiting the web forum, I agree with Vlad and Rikki that
 an old technology is not necessarily inferior.  Given the crap that's
 often created with new tech, it seems like people do not learn from the
 old tech at all.

 I agree with Rikki that it'd be better to add features to the web forum
 in a backward-compatible way, such as putting tag names in the titles or
 using Markdown for the forum's markup, which is perfectly readable in
 email.


We're already doing it. Why not just make it easier? Also makes posts 
like this a thing of the past.


 btw, loving the new "Save and preview" button! :)
Jun 17 2015
parent reply "Jens Bauer" <doctor who.no> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:35:31 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 On 18/06/2015 4:25 p.m., Joakim wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
 wrote:
 I agree with Rikki that it'd be better to add features to the 
 web forum
 in a backward-compatible way, such as putting tag names in the 
 titles or
 using Markdown for the forum's markup, which is perfectly 
 readable in
 email.


 We're already doing it. Why not just make it easier? Also makes 
 posts like this a thing of the past.


+1

Adding a "tag" field encourages tags to be used.

It would be particularly useful for me, as the [embedded] tag 
would probably become my favourite. ;)

... Oh, and a "Like" button (and no dislike button), please. 
-That works very well to encourage a good tone on the ARM 
Connected Community :)
(I think "Like" and "Me too" buttons would only make sense in the 
Web-interface).
Jun 18 2015
parent reply "Tofu Ninja" <emmons0 purdue.edu> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 07:24:34 UTC, Jens Bauer wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:35:31 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
 wrote:

 On 18/06/2015 4:25 p.m., Joakim wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
 wrote:
 I agree with Rikki that it'd be better to add features to the 
 web forum
 in a backward-compatible way, such as putting tag names in 
 the titles or
 using Markdown for the forum's markup, which is perfectly 
 readable in
 email.


 We're already doing it. Why not just make it easier? Also 
 makes posts like this a thing of the past.


 +1

 Adding a "tag" field encourages tags to be used.

 It would be particularly useful for me, as the [embedded] tag 
 would probably become my favourite. ;)

 ... Oh, and a "Like" button (and no dislike button), please. 
 -That works very well to encourage a good tone on the ARM 
 Connected Community :)
 (I think "Like" and "Me too" buttons would only make sense in 
 the Web-interface).


+1

Replies with a +1 on a line by itself could also be considered a 
like, so non web-interface users can like as well.

Also it might be beneficial to show the most liked post near the 
top or have a link to it or something for D-learn so people can 
quickly see the answer.
Jun 18 2015
next sibling parent David Gileadi <gileadis NSPMgmail.com> writes:
On 6/18/15 1:12 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 07:24:34 UTC, Jens Bauer wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:35:31 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 On 18/06/2015 4:25 p.m., Joakim wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
 I agree with Rikki that it'd be better to add features to the web forum
 in a backward-compatible way, such as putting tag names in the
 titles or
 using Markdown for the forum's markup, which is perfectly readable in
 email.


 We're already doing it. Why not just make it easier? Also makes posts
 like this a thing of the past.


 +1

 Adding a "tag" field encourages tags to be used.

 It would be particularly useful for me, as the [embedded] tag would
 probably become my favourite. ;)

 ... Oh, and a "Like" button (and no dislike button), please. -That
 works very well to encourage a good tone on the ARM Connected
 Community :)
 (I think "Like" and "Me too" buttons would only make sense in the
 Web-interface).


 +1

 Replies with a +1 on a line by itself could also be considered a like,
 so non web-interface users can like as well.

 Also it might be beneficial to show the most liked post near the top or
 have a link to it or something for D-learn so people can quickly see the
 answer.


+1
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent reply ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 08:12:03 +0000, Tofu Ninja wrote:


 +1
=20
 Replies with a +1 on a line by itself could also be considered a like,
 so non web-interface users can like as well.


-1.=
Jun 18 2015
parent reply "Tofu Ninja" <emmons0 purdue.edu> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 14:38:19 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 08:12:03 +0000, Tofu Ninja wrote:


 +1
 
 Replies with a +1 on a line by itself could also be considered 
 a like, so non web-interface users can like as well.


 -1.


:( why do you do this to me, it hurts *sniffle*
Jun 18 2015
next sibling parent "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 18:45:16 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 14:38:19 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 08:12:03 +0000, Tofu Ninja wrote:


 +1
 
 Replies with a +1 on a line by itself could also be 
 considered a like, so non web-interface users can like as 
 well.


 -1.


 :( why do you do this to me, it hurts *sniffle*


<3<3<3
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 18:45:14 +0000, Tofu Ninja wrote:


 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 14:38:19 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 08:12:03 +0000, Tofu Ninja wrote:


 +1
=20
 Replies with a +1 on a line by itself could also be considered a like,
 so non web-interface users can like as well.


 -1.


=20
 :( why do you do this to me, it hurts *sniffle*


i feel that this thread needs "-1" to keep some balance.=
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent reply "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 Actually I'm in agreement with Vladimir. NNTP as a backend 
 system works rather well. And personally I was quite surprised 
 at this.


BTW, here's a quick chart I made of how people post to this forum:
http://dump.thecybershadow.net/fd29290682da8888489542fc3dc92409/00000179.png

Although more than half of all posts come from the web interface, 
about 40% use other methods.
Jun 17 2015
next sibling parent Rikki Cattermole <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:
On 18/06/2015 5:17 p.m., Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 Actually I'm in agreement with Vladimir. NNTP as a backend system
 works rather well. And personally I was quite surprised at this.


 BTW, here's a quick chart I made of how people post to this forum:
 http://dump.thecybershadow.net/fd29290682da8888489542fc3dc92409/00000179.png


 Although more than half of all posts come from the web interface, about
 40% use other methods.


That's pretty cool!
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 05:17:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 04:01:42 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
 wrote:

 Actually I'm in agreement with Vladimir. NNTP as a backend 
 system works rather well. And personally I was quite surprised 
 at this.


 BTW, here's a quick chart I made of how people post to this 
 forum:
 http://dump.thecybershadow.net/fd29290682da8888489542fc3dc92409/00000179.png

 Although more than half of all posts come from the web 
 interface, about 40% use other methods.


What's included in Other? I didn't know there were other methods.
Jun 18 2015
parent reply "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 08:47:35 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 05:17:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
 wrote:

 BTW, here's a quick chart I made of how people post to this 
 forum:
 http://dump.thecybershadow.net/fd29290682da8888489542fc3dc92409/00000179.png

 Although more than half of all posts come from the web 
 interface, about 40% use other methods.


 What's included in Other? I didn't know there were other 
 methods.


I think that's mostly NNTP clients which generate a message ID 
locally instead of using the one suggested by the server.
Jun 18 2015
parent reply "tired_eyes" <pastuhov85 gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 08:49:30 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 08:47:35 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 05:17:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
 wrote:

 BTW, here's a quick chart I made of how people post to this 
 forum:
 http://dump.thecybershadow.net/fd29290682da8888489542fc3dc92409/00000179.png

 Although more than half of all posts come from the web 
 interface, about 40% use other methods.


 What's included in Other? I didn't know there were other 
 methods.


 I think that's mostly NNTP clients which generate a message ID 
 locally instead of using the one suggested by the server.


New forums looks much better compared to previous version and 
visually integrates very well into main website.
However, Morbid.Obesity raised some good points, although in a 
harsh manner - webforums and mailing lists are separate things, 
and if something looks like a webforum, it's expected to behave 
like a web-forum. Having forums that are just NNTP-frontend has 
some disadvantages, e.g. lack of moderation and unability to wipe 
awful offtopics like this: 
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mlqla5$bq3$1 digitalmars.com

So... shouldn't be mailing lists separated to webforums? At least 
in theory?

Vladimir Panteleev, I know that it's unpleasant to see your 
project being criticized after so much work, so please don't get 
me wrong. Again, new forums are way better than previous. But 
they still have issues that looks like unresolveable without 
compatibility breakage.

---Anton Pastukhov aka tired_eyes
Jun 18 2015
parent reply "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 10:27:46 UTC, tired_eyes wrote:

 Having forums that are just NNTP-frontend has some 
 disadvantages, e.g. lack of moderation and unability to wipe 
 awful offtopics like this:


We can delete messages and ban users in extreme cases (e.g. 
outright spam).


 So... shouldn't be mailing lists separated to webforums? At 
 least in theory?


Separating them would mean separating the community. Many people 
will not check both. Before forum.dlang.org, proposals to simply 
set up a phpBB instance for an official web forum were rejected 
on the simple basis that Walter Bright and other people from the 
core team would not use them, which would make them a lot less 
useful.
Jun 18 2015
parent reply Daniel =?UTF-8?B?S296w6Fr?= via Digitalmars-d writes:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 11:12:46 +0000
Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com>
wrote:


 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 10:27:46 UTC, tired_eyes wrote:

 Having forums that are just NNTP-frontend has some 
 disadvantages, e.g. lack of moderation and unability to wipe 
 awful offtopics like this:


 
 We can delete messages and ban users in extreme cases (e.g. 
 outright spam).
 

 So... shouldn't be mailing lists separated to webforums? At 
 least in theory?


 
 Separating them would mean separating the community.


Yep, that would be perfect ;-). Now when newbie comes to dlang and
read a few post on forum, his impression must be something like WTF.
Jun 18 2015
next sibling parent ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:41:27 +0200, Daniel Koz=C3=A1k via Digitalmars-d wro=
te:


 Yep, that would be perfect ;-). Now when newbie comes to dlang and read
 a few post on forum, his impression must be something like WTF.


so he shouldn't read "general". "D.learn" is newbie-friendly, one will=20
usually get a warm start and alot of explanations here. and if one=20
chooses to avoid "D.learn" 'cause "hey, i'm not a newb, i'm a K00L=20
HAX0R!"... well, that was his own choice.=
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent "tired_eyes" <pastuhov85 gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 11:41:42 UTC, Daniel Kozák wrote:

 On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 11:12:46 +0000
 Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com>
 wrote:


 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 10:27:46 UTC, tired_eyes wrote:

 Having forums that are just NNTP-frontend has some 
 disadvantages, e.g. lack of moderation and unability to wipe 
 awful offtopics like this:


 
 We can delete messages and ban users in extreme cases (e.g. 
 outright spam).
 

 So... shouldn't be mailing lists separated to webforums? At 
 least in theory?


 
 Separating them would mean separating the community.


 Yep, that would be perfect ;-). Now when newbie comes to dlang 
 and read a few post on forum, his impression must be something 
 like WTF.


Although I absolutely understand reasons for the current state of 
things, topics similar to this one will appear in the future.
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 05:17:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

 Although more than half of all posts come from the web 
 interface, about 40% use other methods.


There's also people like me: when I got to post, I use the web 
interface (because the mailman gateway is so unbelievably bad), 
but I do all the reading on my own clients.

If I had to keep up with this through just the web interface, it 
would be impossible, web interfaces are just too hard to use.
Jun 18 2015
next sibling parent reply "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 12:45:09 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 05:17:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
 wrote:

 Although more than half of all posts come from the web 
 interface, about 40% use other methods.


 There's also people like me: when I got to post, I use the web 
 interface (because the mailman gateway is so unbelievably bad), 
 but I do all the reading on my own clients.


As far as I know, you are the only person who does this.


 If I had to keep up with this through just the web interface, 
 it would be impossible, web interfaces are just too hard to use.


Do you mean in general (which I don't think is true), or do you 
have particular grievances that I might be able to address?
Jun 18 2015
next sibling parent ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 12:49:31 +0000, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:


 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 12:45:09 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 05:17:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

 Although more than half of all posts come from the web interface,
 about 40% use other methods.


 There's also people like me: when I got to post, I use the web
 interface (because the mailman gateway is so unbelievably bad), but I
 do all the reading on my own clients.


=20
 As far as I know, you are the only person who does this.


no, i'm ocasionally posting from web too. and i'm planning to write my=20
own client, with option "use web to post".=
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 12:49:33 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

 Do you mean in general (which I don't think is true), or do you 
 have particular grievances that I might be able to address?


You probably could address it, but the beauty of a distributed 
system is you don't have to since my stuff doesn't apply to 
everyone; my client has all the little bits I like which are 
probably different than what you like.

But the keyboard shortcuts don't match my habits and the real 
time update aren't noticeable enough for me, which makes 
following everything kinda hard - I like to skim things as they 
come in. (i've been toying with the idea of using the web 
notifications api more but i just prefer running my own programs 
anyway. Might be a cool feature for people who want it though, 
and it looks like you already have background updates of new 
things, probably would be just a couple dozen lines of javascript 
to add).
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 12:45:09 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 If I had to keep up with this through just the web interface, 
 it would be impossible, web interfaces are just too hard to use.


I think it is quite ok, but maybe your needs are different since 
you write the weekly?

Anyway, I don't think the d.learn issue should be a big deal as 
being visible on sites like stackoverflow is essentially better 
for stable languages when you scale up.
(Although terribly confusing for non-stable languages.)
Jun 18 2015
prev sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/17/2015 8:55 PM, Morbid.Obesity wrote:

 [...]


Please, a little more decorum would be appreciated.
Jun 18 2015