TexasCHLforum.com

I know this looks like an attack on the site and the site designer, but that's not how I intended it. I just continue to find it a bit cumbersome to poke through a ton of subforums, some of which appear to be duplicates.

If there is a section I don't want to read, I don't have too...

The problem I that I usually read the General TX CHL Discussion but then find that a good bit of what I consider to be General TX CHL Discussion ends up in other subforums instead.

It makes good sense to have subforums, but it seems to me that if there are too many, it gets cumbersome to poke through them all trying to find the one that is exactly the flavor that you want when there could be just a few that encompass a broader spectrum of topics.

Generally, I would say that a lightly used forum, such as this one should start with a very small number of subforums each encompassing a fairly wide range of topics. Then gradually add more as the amount of information posted in the subforums becomes so great that the daily input exceeds a page or two on a subforum. That makes it easy to come, check in once in awhile, find what you're interested in and then wrap things up. Otherwise it's just jerking the forum users around by making them look in multiple places when there's no real need to break up the posts in the first place.

JohnKSa wrote:I know this looks like an attack on the site and the site designer, but that's not how I intended it.

I don't see it that way, and I don't think you are hostile, ungrateful, or whatever.

Here's the deal: bookmark this URL:
http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... d=newposts

Use that to follow the forum. Ignore the thread titles that don't interest you. They will eventually disappear. Forget about subforums or sections unless you want to start a new thread.

If you want to find something older than yesterday, use Google advanced search. Here's an example:
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=holst ... sCHL_Forum

- Jim

Use that to follow the forum. Ignore the thread titles that don't interest you. They will eventually disappear. Forget about subforums or sections unless you want to start a new thread.

What's ironic about this is that it seems to me that it's the next best thing to proof that what I'm saying is right on target.

If there weren't so many subforums, you could just go to the subforum(s) you were interested in and look for new posts. The fact that several folks on this thread have indicated that they access the forum using a technique to completely bypass the forum architecture surely means something...

Thanks for the link.

Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I can not change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. ...

As with any budding forum...this one will undergo changes. There may well be areas that are starting to prove themselves redundant, I am sure Charles will address this as time permits. As I recall, he has a full time job and many other responsibilities and interests.

No doubt, he appreciates everyones suggestions... or he wouldn't have this "sub-forum" in place for that purpose.

I know the forum members are NOT being critical, and I am equally sure that Charles accepts these posts in the spirit in which they are offered.

After a point/suggestion has been made however, we would do well to give it time to be "digested" before being implemented (if at all).

Meanwhile, I know we will all continue to enjoy our time here...and to learn from the contributions of others.



Flint.

flintknapper wrote:Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I can not change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. ...

As with any budding forum...this one will undergo changes. There may well be areas that are starting to prove themselves redundant, I am sure Charles will address this as time permits. As I recall, he has a full time job and many other responsibilities and interests.

No doubt, he appreciates everyones suggestions... or he wouldn't have this "sub-forum" in place for that purpose.

I know the forum members are NOT being critical, and I am equally sure that Charles accepts these posts in the spirit in which they are offered.

After a point/suggestion has been made however, we would do well to give it time to be "digested" before being implemented (if at all).

Meanwhile, I know we will all continue to enjoy our time here...and to learn from the contributions of others.



Flint.

Very Well Said!

JohnKSa wrote:

seamusTX wrote:Use that to follow the forum. Ignore the thread titles that don't interest you. They will eventually disappear. Forget about subforums or sections unless you want to start a new thread.

What's ironic about this is that it seems to me that it's the next best thing to proof that what I'm saying is right on target.

Like most members, I lurked the forum for a while, then read and had my say about each new topic that came up. After that, I'm only interested in new topics. The "newposts" link is like looking in my mailbox to see if I have new mail.

The extreme alternative to forums like this is rec.guns. It essentially has one section for millions of posts over the years. Thread drift is a problem there, and a lot of good information is buried under inappropriate subject headings. It's quite difficult to search.

Nothing in this life is perfect. You learn to deal with it.

JohnKSa wrote:Thanks for the link.

You're welcome.

- Jim

John, by no means have I taken your comments as an attack on me or TexasCHLforum. Many of the changes to the forum that have been made over the last 23 months have been at the request or suggestion of the members and I appreciate their input.

I believe I better understand your objection to the number of sub-forums now. If I’m right, you feel it would be easier to review all new posts if a reader simply had to click on one or a few sub-forum headers and view the new posts in that section. If this is what you mean, then I have to agree with you. To use an absurd example (I know you’re not suggesting this), if we had only one sub-forum “General,� then all a reader would have to do is click on it and look at the “Subject� lines and dates of all the posts to see which ones they wanted to read. This would be faster than going back to the main page and entering another sub-forum.

I was looking at a member’s use of the forum from a different perspective, but I see what you mean. As bulletin boards go, TexasCHLforum is small, though much larger than I ever anticipated. When it was created, I wanted TexasCHLforum to be not only a friendly venue for discussions, but also a good resource for people interested in getting a CHL or new to the CHL community and the architecture reflects that theme. If a person wants to find out what states recognize a Texas CHL, then they can look in the “Reciprocity� sub-forum rather than have to look through a much larger sub-forum or be good at crafting word searches. Similarly, if they are interested in reloading or shooting ranges, they can limit the scope of their reading to those subjects.

It’s clear that some of the sub-forums simply don’t have much activity and can be combined with others. For example, the use of the Market section is such that I can combine all of the “for sale� sub-forums into one, leaving the FFL’s in a separate sub-forum. As you pointed out, the Carry Issues section was one of the original sections but has only 53 posts since Dec. 22, 2004 so it can be combined with the General CHL Discussion sub-forum. I’m undecided about combining the Links sections. I want a separate section for governmental, thus authoritative, links, but I guess I could accomplish that with a single Links section with a separate sticky.

As are all users of phpbb bulletin board software, I’ve been waiting for release of Ver. 3.0 a/k/a Olympus. It will have some great new features, including one that will make it much harder for bogus bot registrations. I was planning to do any site reorganization during the testing of this new version. (It’s not merely an upgrade, but an entirely new package that I will test before launching.) However, since you guys have made me focus on it now, I may as well make the changes before I have a “Sometimers� moment and forget what I want to do!

The “View posts since last visit� feature makes it possible for people to view only the new posts in a single list, as John and other find more useful, while other readers can still focus on the subject matter that most interests them by going to individual sub-forums. By combining the sub-forums previously mentioned, the latter group of people will have to look through fewer sub-forums without losing the benefit of the topic-specific subsections.

I don’t want anyone to hesitate to suggest changes to the forum. Many of the changes made over the last 23 months are the result of people caring enough about the community you folks have created to recommend improvements. I’m not offended at receiving suggestions, nor do I want anyone to be offended if they are not implemented. Just to show Piney and HighVelocity that I’m not picking on them, I’m going to add a “Competition� sub-forum just for them!

Chas.

Charles,

This suggestion relates to using the 'New Posts' function.

This is mainly how I read the posts, but I frequently lose the info by closing the wrong IE Window. Then, if I use 'New Posts', it will be blank or not have the previously displayed messages.

What I would like to see is a date option included in the search function. Being able to see all posts created within the last 24 hours or one week would be useful to me.

If the 'New Posts' are not available, then I resort to actually looking at the most active forums.

I don't have the ability to add a date feature to the search function, but it may be included in Ver. 3.0. I know what you mean about the recent post feature. That's what I use to make moderating easier, but if I close IE or if it times out while I'm on the phone at the office, then I've lost that ability.

Chas.

Thanks to all--I appreciate the thoughtful responses.

Best Regard,

John

seamusTX wrote:1. It ain't broke.
2. Don't fix it.

Thanks for all your work, Charles.

- Jim

^ what he said.


i moderate on a website with ~75 or so forum catagories, and a dozen or so of them have sub-forums. This site is rather scaled down and easy to understand in comparison.