Totallympics Suggestions and Problems Thread

[OlympicIRL 5,527]

3 minutes ago, dcro said:

 

I love it!

 

 

The Politics Lounge is a great name though

 

[heywoodu 14,930]

4 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said:

 

 

The Politics Lounge is a great name though

 

That sounds much more like a place with some nice quiet space to sit down with a drink in your hand and say how shitty 'political thing A' is and how awesome 'political person B' is 

[bestmen 2,807]

one title in GIF format is the best

[vinipereira 3,239]

48 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

 

- A thread is a thread, it's not necessary to specify that in the thread title

- An OP is the first thing we as users (and more importantly, newcomers) see: basic information like a link to an official website and a schedule should be there (without having to scroll down and/or click on a link to open another site, as it is now, users don't want to have to open more sites, they want to see their info on-screen)

- If there's big news, people should feel free to open a thread about it without having a huge chance of this being merged into some general thread. It's a forum, once the big news is not news anymore, it'll die down by itself

- The bar to opening new threads is way too high when either you have to use a strict format or a moderator comes in and changes the whole thing without being asked to do so

 

 - Agreed, but I feel the word "Thread" is mostly used in general threads, like "Music Thread", "Movies Thread" or whatever, which is quite common in some other places (like skycrapercity, for instance). I don't see what's the big problem with the word, it's fine with it, and it's fine without it. Maybe it should be deleted if you guys are so pissed by it.

 

- You suggest a link to an official site, but then goes on about how users don't want to click on links - which seems, to me, a diss on the results forum. Honestly, when the "format" for Opening posts was discussed, it was decided that it was just better a simple image and maybe the link for the results site (and, sometimes, just the image), because we didn't want a format for shedules or anything else - it would be just more work that frankly most users don't want to do. But people are free to post whatever they want, including a schedule like you did in some threads.

 

- If the news are, ideed, "big", no problem whatsoever.

 

- Maybe there are a few changes, but I almost never see threads getting deleted. For instance, I never deleted one thread on this site (except for spam threads). So people are welcome to open more threads. Someone said that wanted to open something about history of sports and that's great, as it is to open threads about "personal projects" etc. You talk about a "strict format", but we don't have a format for Non-Olympic section and some others - as far as I'm concerned, the "format" can be seen only in some general and competition threads.

 

[heywoodu 14,930]

8 minutes ago, vinipereira said:

 

 - Agreed, but I feel the word "Thread" is mostly used in general threads, like "Music Thread", "Movies Thread" or whatever, which is quite common in some other places (like skycrapercity, for instance). I don't see what's the big problem with the word, it's fine with it, and it's fine without it. Maybe it should be deleted if you guys are so pissed by it.

 

 

I think my point was a bit mistaken. It often feels like if you don't open something in the exact right way, it will get changed to all fit in the exact same format. Like I said, it's fine with or without it, it's not about one word, the point is that these things should be mostly left to whoever opens the thread.

 

Quote

- You suggest a link to an official site, but then goes on about how users don't want to click on links - which seems, to me, a diss on the results forum. Honestly, when the "format" for Opening posts was discussed, it was decided that it was just better a simple image and maybe the link for the results site (and, sometimes, just the image), because we didn't want a format for shedules or anything else - it would be just more work that frankly most users don't want to do. But people are free to post whatever they want, including a schedule like you did in some threads.

 

But there is no need for a format for a schedule. Again, users should be free to do it how they want: if I want to open a thread about competition A, I should be free to open a thread about competition A, including an opening post I like. If that includes a link to the Totallympics results portal, fine, if that includes a link to a more widely known and used results site, just as fine, and if that includes a schedule (no matter if that's a manually written one or a Wikipedia screenshot) or no schedule at all, perfectly fine as well. Most users don't want to add those 'extra' things, and that's fine too. Other users do, and they should be just as free to open a thread with an opening post as they want to write it. It really doesn't matter if an opening post in subforum Cycling doesn't have the exact same format as an opening post in subforum Luge.

 

Quote

- Maybe there are a few changes, but I almost never see threads getting deleted. For instance, I never deleted one thread on this site (except for spam threads). So people are welcome to open more threads. Someone said that wanted to open something about history of sports and that's great, as it is to open threads about "personal projects" etc. You talk about a "strict format", but we don't have a format for Non-Olympic section and some others - as far as I'm concerned, the "format" can be seen only in some general and competition threads.

Didn't really mean threads being deleted, more stuff being edited. I don't have any examples from the top of my mind, but I do know more than once I've gotten rather frustrated after making a decent post, only to see it (unasked) being changed to fit in a specific exact format. That's just annoying, becuse just like in the previous two points: as long as a user doesn't monumentally mess up something and needs some help getting a post right, it's fine. Also if it doesn't follow a pre-decided format. 

[vinipereira 3,239]

4 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

I think my point was a bit mistaken. It often feels like if you don't open something in the exact right way, it will get changed to all fit in the exact same format. Like I said, it's fine with or without it, it's not about one word, the point is that these things should be mostly left to whoever opens the thread.

 

Agreed, but it seemed like there was a big problem with the word "Thread" and, honestly, I don't think it was Totallympics moderators who invented that Personally, I think the threads work in the exact same way with or without the word, so I'm gonna suggest @Sindo that it's not really necessary.

 

23 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

But there is no need for a format for a schedule. Again, users should be free to do it how they want: if I want to open a thread about competition A, I should be free to open a thread about competition A, including an opening post I like. If that includes a link to the Totallympics results portal, fine, if that includes a link to a more widely known and used results site, just as fine, and if that includes a schedule (no matter if that's a manually written one or a Wikipedia screenshot) or no schedule at all, perfectly fine as well. Most users don't want to add those 'extra' things, and that's fine too. Other users do, and they should be just as free to open a thread with an opening post as they want to write it. It really doesn't matter if an opening post in subforum Cycling doesn't have the exact same format as an opening post in subforum Luge.

 

Didn't really mean threads being deleted, more stuff being edited. I don't have any examples from the top of my mind, but I do know more than once I've gotten rather frustrated after making a decent post, only to see it (unasked) being changed to fit in a specific exact format. That's just annoying, becuse just like in the previous two points: as long as a user doesn't monumentally mess up something and needs some help getting a post right, it's fine. Also if it doesn't follow a pre-decided format. 

 

I agree with some things (again, the diss about the results forum is unnecessary), but in most cases I think the original information posted by the users isn't deleted, but maybe modified to include some things. In the sections about the Olympic Games, for instance, you can see multiples threads in which Sindo just included a logo, but kept the info wrote by the poster in the opening post. Maybe we can all have a discussion about what's best. Personally, I like to see at least the logo of the competition in the first post (there have been some cases in which even the users have asked us to include a logo), because it gives a general feel about the competition. I agree that every single thing doesn't need to have the same format, but some direction might be necessary to avoid turn things messy.

 

[dcro 10,210]

Participating sides pretty much agreed on Le Cafe and Politics Lounge (Politics Pub), but it's back to General Chat.

 

The exact name doesn't even matter as much, as long as Totallympics becomes more casual. And that should be the number one priority to be honest...

[heywoodu 14,930]

2 minutes ago, vinipereira said:

 

Agreed, but it seemed like there was a big problem with the word "Thread" and, honestly, I don't think it was Totallympics moderators who invented that Personally, I think the threads work in the exact same way with or without the word, so I'm gonna suggest @Sindo that it's not really necessary.

 

 

I agree with some things (again, the diss about the results forum is unnecessary), but in most cases I think the original information posted by the users isn't deleted, but maybe modified to include some things. In the sections about the Olympic Games, for instance, you can see multiples threads in which Sindo just included a logo, but kept the info wrote by the poster in the opening post. Maybe we can all have a discussion about what's best. Personally, I like to see at least the logo of the competition in the first post (there have been some cases in which even the users have asked us to include a logo), because it gives a general feel about the competition. I agree that every single thing doesn't need to have the same format, but some direction might be necessary to avoid turn things messy.

 

I don't mean it as a diss, I think for smaller sports and competitions that don't have well-known websites for results, the portal can be very useful. For sports like cycling or cross-country/alpine skiing though, I think the specialized big sites are just much more suitable (honestly, not to offend anyone, but I can't think of any reason why someone would go to the Totallympics results portal for a specific cycling result instead of Procyclingstats, or to the results portal for the result of a certain alpine skiing competition instead of fis-ski.com), but that's another discussion. 

 

I agree something like a logo is fine, no problem, but it should all feel a bit more open for people to post what they want. I'll admit I'm not the best to put my thoughts into words, so...that's not helping  

[Sindo 1,499]

30 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

I think my point was a bit mistaken. It often feels like if you don't open something in the exact right way, it will get changed to all fit in the exact same format. Like I said, it's fine with or without it, it's not about one word, the point is that these things should be mostly left to whoever opens the thread.

 

But there is no need for a format for a schedule. Again, users should be free to do it how they want: if I want to open a thread about competition A, I should be free to open a thread about competition A, including an opening post I like. If that includes a link to the Totallympics results portal, fine, if that includes a link to a more widely known and used results site, just as fine, and if that includes a schedule (no matter if that's a manually written one or a Wikipedia screenshot) or no schedule at all, perfectly fine as well. Most users don't want to add those 'extra' things, and that's fine too. Other users do, and they should be just as free to open a thread with an opening post as they want to write it. It really doesn't matter if an opening post in subforum Cycling doesn't have the exact same format as an opening post in subforum Luge.

 

Didn't really mean threads being deleted, more stuff being edited. I don't have any examples from the top of my mind, but I do know more than once I've gotten rather frustrated after making a decent post, only to see it (unasked) being changed to fit in a specific exact format. That's just annoying, becuse just like in the previous two points: as long as a user doesn't monumentally mess up something and needs some help getting a post right, it's fine. Also if it doesn't follow a pre-decided format. 

 

What you want is "format anarchy", but you should also consider this: let's say we have user A who opens threads following a template and user B who opens threads without following any template. This will lead admins (even unconsciously) to push user A to open more and more threads, hoping he will open threads before user B so that the format admins want is applied.

 

The natural solution for this is that admins do not care if user A or user B opens the thread, because the format will be the same anyway.

[heywoodu 14,930]

Just now, Sindo said:

 

What you want is "format anarchy", but you should also consider this: let's say we have user A who opens threads following a template and user B who opens threads without following any template. This will lead admins (even unconsciously) to push user A to open more and more threads, hoping he will open threads before user B so that the format admins want is applied.

 

The natural solution for this is that admins do not care if user A or user B opens the thread, because the format will be the same anyway.

Then that's the problem, not user B opening threads in the 'wrong' way. People shouldn't be pushed to open threads in the first place, people should simply feel free to open a thread they want when they see something interesting is coming up and there's no thread yet.