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 
something like ##interfacing ##Java ##DLL at the end of the 
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 
 something like ##interfacing ##Java ##DLL at the end of the 
 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 
 something like ##interfacing ##Java ##DLL at the end of the 
 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
 like ##interfacing ##Java ##DLL at the end of the 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!
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