Seems we have differing opinions on how many forums we should have. Majority rules.
Printable View
Seems we have differing opinions on how many forums we should have. Majority rules.
There are those who are of the opinion that if there are only a few forums to post in, then all topics will be funneled into those few forums regardless of what they are, and they will grow fat and large and productive. That also means with more activity comes more page-turning of the forum index to find a thread that's only a week old. So that's one school of thought.
The other school of thought is to make a plethora of forums, and categorize them appropriately, such that categories people may not be interested in can be hidden at will to shorten the main forum index page a bit. Something like this:
Yeah, that's roughly the old style in a nutshell. :P
- General
- General Discussion
- General Gaming
- New Members Forum
- Hot
- ASWGL
- GB
- Debate Room
- ZC
- ZC Beta
- Special Interest
- Archives
----------------------
Although if there is a focus on keeping the forum count low, there is still the option of just hiding the categories that a person doesn't want, or just grouping all non-ZC forums into one single category, though that denies a user the ability to hide a smaller group of forums they never utilize.
----------------------
Although ultimately, new ideas for new forums wouldn't be horrible. Although let's keep in mind that there is a balance between having one hundred empty forums and two horribly packed forums.
Also, if we add new forums in the future, we might have to sift out topics from the old forum to go into the new forum. It's a very tedious process, but it's not the worst thing to do.
One of my favorites was the old Think Tank forum, however that never received much traffic even when it was still lively here. Also, without a random assortment of post-pubescent idiots, ASWGL and GB likely won't be much fun either. I guess for me it's a toss up between bringing back an older forum creating something newer.
One thing that does seem odd, from a completely objective point-of-view, is that Armageddon Games does not have any type of general gaming discussion.
A Think Tank type forum would be interesting, especially now that it's filling a void considering PureZC recently closed their Debate Room.
I think a few extra forums would be good to have (especially a General Gaming Discussion type deal for the reason Gleeok suggested), but not so many that you have 500 forums with like 30 posts each.
I will agree very much that AGN needs the Think Tank forums back. AGN can certainly handle it. Even Rock Bottom wasn't a bad forum to have.
I have my own opinions on that, really. :P If you provide the space and amenities, people will come to it. If there are reasons not to provide them, well, to each their own.
Due to overwhelming support, Video Game Discussion and Think Tank are being made active. Invite your friends.
Lists work better than words. Bold shows a new forum
Armageddon Games Forums
- General
- Discussion
- Forum Games
- Video Game Discussion
- Rock Bottom
- Think Tank
- Religion
- Politics
- Number Crunch
- Zelda Classic
- ZC Discussion
- ZC Bugs
- Quest Discussion
- ZQuest Discussion
- Tutorials
- Scripting (After 2.5 is released)
- ZC Development
- Beta Discussion
- Beta Bugs
- All the Bug Sub-forums
- Neofirst
Anything third-bullet or further gets collapsed on the main page, so you would see:
Armageddon Games Forums
- General
- Discussion
- Think Tank
- Zelda Classic
- ZC Discussion
- ZQuest Discussion
- ZC Development
- Beta Discussion
- Neofirst
Interesting tree sir. Perhaps what we ought to do, now that ideas are hurtling back and forth, is operate from a foundation and expand outward from there, rather than from non-specific points in space aiming for different destinations, as it were.
Perhaps we should work from AGN's original plan and expand outward, or inward from there? The question then becomes, what did AGN previously have, and what should be changed from that design?
Define Number Crunch? Not digging Forum games. I honestly couldn't care less about post count, so I vote leave them in GD. Anybody disagree?
I liked the Forum Games forum because it created a clear and definitive division between the various levels of "seriousness" of topics and conversations. If people saw people counting to ten thousand or commenting on peoples' avatars in one topic, and in the very next topic discussing life plans and their children and how they met their spouses or whatever, I would give serious pause to that particular forum. I wouldn't be able to take it seriously, I feel. Having a separate forum for Forum Games gives it the freedom to do as it pleases. GD doesn't have such a luxury, when it's the default location for chatter without absolutely spamming up the place with completely useless messages. It's basically the last resort of an intellectual standard, GD.
Well, Think Tank says that it's a place to talk about mathematical puzzles, so I figured Number Crunch would be a place for that. Posting in the general 'Think Tank' area would be about advice or brain teasers, whereas the heavy mathematics, heavy politics, and heavy religion would be reserved for subforums (so that people wouldn't have to see that stuff unless it's what they were looking for).
Forum Games was not so much about post count (who cares about that?) but rather about separating the games from the general discussion so that, if the user wants to play a game, they can all be located easily without eating up the 'pinned' space or needless bumping.
Here lies the fun part about creating and managing forums. There is a unique balance that must be discovered between having too many forums and too few forums. A forum that serves a category of personality is useful, whereas a forum devoted to a sub-category of that same personality becomes a bit much when it stretches that category too thin.Quote:
Well, Think Tank says that it's a place to talk about mathematical puzzles, so I figured Number Crunch would be a place for that. Posting in the general 'Think Tank' area would be about advice or brain teasers, whereas the heavy mathematics, heavy politics, and heavy religion would be reserved for subforums (so that people wouldn't have to see that stuff unless it's what they were looking for).
I suppose one question we could ask ourselves while deciding on forums and subforums for everyone is "What's the harm in having this vs removing it?" We ought to imagine as many negative scenarios with the inclusion of each particular sub-forum as possible. If the positives dramatically outweigh the negatives, it's time to create a forum. If the positives don't quite outweigh the negatives, then the sub-forum's existence can likely be deferred to its parent forum to provide for its functionality.
It's why I made a poll for the revival of Mercy's Tasty Edibles forum. There is a LOT of food out there from here and many other different cultures. The question posited is whether or not there is enough demand to warrant an entire forum for it. I.e. if it stays inactive, but still had a lot of threads in it, then that would mean that there is a lot of food in the world that people want to eat, yes, but it's not quite pressing enough to constantly need to make new threads in it. I mean once you've made Sushi, that's it. You've made it. The thread exists. Another one on it won't be necessary.
On the other side of the coin, new math puzzles are constantly being created. The catch is, what's the harm in placing them in the Think Tank? I know I personally sure wouldn't mind if math puzzles sit next to intellectually inclined topics at all. Who would? (If you do, speak up now. :P )
In my experience, Mathematics can be as intimidating as religion or politics to a very large portion of the populace (myself excluded, since math is my thing). So I propose we put it to a vote.
And I was (I suppose incorrectly) picturing the main context of the Think Tank as a 'what would you do' hypothetical discussion forum.
Ah. From my own experience, or perspective at least, the Think Tank forum was an extension of General Discussion, but for heated debates to take root, or controversial issues to be discussed in a manner that wouldn't erupt into flaming. It was filled with issues that ordinarily wouldn't need to take place in General Discussion. Oddly enough, I wouldn't be surprised if a math puzzle found its way into General Discussion, but I would be surprised if someone didn't know whether to place a topic in the Think Tank or in GD. The line is hazy for some and obvious for others. I think, in general, the moderators can move topics wherever they see the most reason to have them.
But yes, a poll is always a good idea.
Yay Think Tank is back!
Also, what to do about Beta Suggestions? It either doesn't need to be closed anymore, or there's no point to it seeing how ZC is not in beta development currently. ..Hmm..
Mm, how right you are. Tucked the forum away for now.
Definitely glad Think Tank is back.
Don't forget to peruse this forum for other topics regarding AGN's revival. :) If you have a poll you'd like to start, do please bring it up here or anywhere else, or PM ctrl-alt-del or I. We cannot stress it enough that opinions are worth more than gold. There's no reason not to excel. :D
I'm glad to see that you are branching out the forums a bit, within reason. We've seen a lot of forum consolidation as activity levels have dropped, but the interesting thing about having more forums is that they can be moderated by different people.
This gives a unique flavor to the discussions within different forums, even when the topics being discussed are not really all that different. Back in the day, moderators loved staking out claims over one forum vs. another and part of the reward of being a moderator was to have your own turf. This is hard to have when there are only 1 or 2 forums that you might be interested in.
My only other suggestion right now regarding forum count is that if you're going to do sub-forums, please make them all visible from the main page. I don't want to have to click into one forum before I can see or click into another.
Yes, that's more than easy enough. Whenever I put down a sub-forum, I have the URL to the subforum in its parent forum's description, at the very least. Helps very much.
Interesting idea with the moderators. Perhaps I am in favor of having a large moderation team due to the distribution of ideas and coverage that it presents. The concept of fighting over turf is an interesting one as well. It means that if one person has an idea for how to handle a topic in another forum they're passionate about, they present it to someone who observes that forum. If one person moderates more than three forums, a sense of "Well, all is well, because it suits my style" kind of falls into place, which may not be in the best interest of the particular events of that one forum that something is actually happening in. Just a theory there.
I was always fond of the Anime forum, and spent most of my early years there. I was one of the most active users of that forum. I was sad it see it finally go, but I understood why it and many others had to. I'm all for having sub-forums for specific topics, but I agree that it needs to be based on traffic and usage. Seeing the occasional "Have you seen * anime?" pop up in GD is fine. When it gets to be a new topic every day, then there's a call to make one or bring back the old forum.
In short, I think it should be kept simple for now until the user base is back.