New Topics/Category Organisation Update 20:45 - Post 100

Zaph

Sad Professor wrote: »

Here’s what I think:

The categories don’t work anymore and I don’t think there’s anything this or any future reorganisation can do to fix them. Whether it’s this menu system or the old one, categories are just a fundamentally flawed way to navigate so many different forums. And I’d argue any attempt to create a forum navigation system will turn out equally flawed. We’re talking about mini communities based around particular topics. Once established most of them take on a life of their own regardless of whatever category or sub-category they belong to.

The solution I’d argue is to stop organising forums around categories or at least hide any such organisation away from the user. Keep the sub-forums but ditch the categories and sub-categories. Have a simple A-Z list of forums on the front page. Provided the naming and descriptions of the forums is clear and obvious, new and existing users shouldn’t have any difficulty finding their chosen topic. In addition, all forums could have a short list at the top or in the sidebar linking to other forums that might interest the user. After Hours could have a link to The Cuckoo’s Nest, Ranting & Raving, etc. Apple Devices could have a link to the Mac forum and Tablets. Film Production could have a link to Audio-Video Editing, Animation and Theatre. And so on and so forth.

This would be a great way to promote smaller forums that are currently all but ignored as a result of their category placement and would be a great way for new users to gradually discover all the forums on offer, especially the more unique ones that they might not think to search for.

The issue with having an alphabetic list is that with the guts of a thousand forums those lower down the list alphabetically, with some exceptions such as Soccer, will be virtually ignored as people aren't going to trawl through endless lists of forums. However I do like the "If you like this forum why not try..." idea.

my3cents

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Its a completely different approach but I'd have a front page of named thematic buttons, when hoovered an overlaid page of individual forums would be visible for each.

There would also be a red panel in the middle marked Random Thread which would take thrill seekers to a current matter of discussion

Not sure I totally agree but a change of colour or having a slightly different shade of colour for submenus would help a lot.

Sad Professor

Zaph wrote: »

The issue with having an alphabetic list is that with the guts of a thousand forums those lower down the list alphabetically, with some exceptions such as Soccer, will be virtually ignored as people aren't going to trawl through endless lists of forums. However I do like the "If you like this forum why not try..." idea.

Well I'm assuming most people what their interests are and thus what forums they are looking for. For this reason clearly named forums like soccer will never be ignored. A new user will search for it or immediately scroll to s to find it. For users (existing or new) who know what they are looking for, an alphabetical list of forums will beat a bunch of arbitrarily organised categories every time.

I’ll admit an alphabetical list isn’t good for browsing or discovering forums that you *might* like, but categories are no better since people will never think to look for many forums under a particular category. Okay so it’s nice to have all the tv forums grouped together, but categories like entertainment, society, social & fun, hobbies etc - I just don’t think people just don’t think in those terms.

All the front page of the site has to say is that we’re biggest forum in Ireland with discussion boards covering almost every conceivable topic - here’s an A-Z list, forum search or newbie forum to get you started. We shouldn't play down the really popular forums like AH, Politics, etc, we should play them up! Then once users have joined and started posting, use other methods, such as in-forum promotion and links, to help them discover the rest of the site.

Categories are too confusing and overwhelming to new users used to social networking sites. And the site has grown too large with too many forums for them to be useful for existing users either. An A-Z list of forums might seem primitive but it’s simple.

Beasty

We've moved from what - was it 10? to now 16 categories within the "Topics" list. The general consensus seems to be that the additional categories are an improvement and it seems to me that some forums (eg. Motors, DIY, Gardening) are much easier to locate with the new category structure. The old format of listing the cats across the top would simply no longer work with so many different categories to accommodate. It may be that it takes an extra click to find the forum posters are looking for (the search option will work easily for most forums anyway), but their location appears more intuitive, making it easier to work out where a lot of stuff is likely to be

I've only over the past day or so being exploring a bit more with the new format, and I'm not finding any particular issues. Would someone new to the site know there is a dedicated forum to ask all things about Mustard? Probably not - is it a forum they are likely to post in - well if so they would in all likelihood type "mustard" in the search box to then discover there is a dedicated forum. Having said that I would imagine there are a lot of forums that have so little traffic that a cull/consolidation of some of them would not go amiss - that's probably for another thread, but I think that there are certainly areas where the site could be streamlined which in itself may make navigation through the new menu system easier.

Beasty

Sad Professor wrote: »

For this reason clearly named forums like soccer will never be ignored. A new user will search for it or immediately scroll to s to find it. For users (existing or new) who know what they are looking for, an alphabetical list of forums will beat a bunch of arbitrarily organised categories every time.

They would in all likelihood type "f" and fail miserably to find the Soccer Forum - they will certainly have an idea it's going to be in "Sports" though

I think the sheer number of forums make an alphabetical list impractical as the first port of call to find a particular "topic"

LoonyLovegood

I decided to give it a few days to get used to before making any comments, because let's be honest, everyone's immediate reaction is RAWR CHANGE IS BAD.

I like the idea behind it, but the implementation isn't great. My main issue is in topics, everything goes down. Getting to any college forum that appears after Mary I is pretty awkward. I've no clue if it's even possible, but if it could be a case where if you enter a third level of sub-fora (ie, education - third level - LONG LIST OF COLLEGE SPECIFIC FORA) the others minimise? It's the awkward scrolling down that's difficult, I tend to use my space bar to scroll down a page and when I can't do that I get bored easily.

Again, I do like the idea behind it, and I understand exactly where this is coming from, and I think the categories are good, but I don't think it's a fantastic implementation for the amount of fora that Boards has.

Tokyo

Zaph wrote: »

However I do like the "If you like this forum why not try..." idea.

Probably going off on a tangent here at this stage, but it actually came up in conversation about two days ago between a few of the CMods, that having 'Related Forums" or "Suggested Forums" at the top of the page would be a very useful addition if it were possible in the future, not to mention bring traffic to the less busy forums on the site....

http://i.imgur.com/nhStVtx.png

Sad Professor

mike_ie wrote: »

Probably going off on a tangent here at this stage, but it actually came up in conversation about two days ago between a few of the CMods, that having 'Related Forums" or "Suggested Forums" at the top of the page would be a very useful addition if it were possible in the future, not to mention bring traffic to the less busy forums on the site....

http://i.imgur.com/nhStVtx.png

This is kind of what I was thinking alright. Though I think will probably work even better in the new layout, which is going to have a sidebar for charters, stickies, etc. Suggested forums would fit in nicely.

Posy

Really liking the 'Related Forums' idea.

Red Alert

I don't like it, I'm sorry. Adverts.ie is being inappropriately featured above. I still don't get why the bar also disappears on the Talk To forums - I usually want to go somewhere else in Boards after being on a Talk To forum.

testicle

It's ****ing horrible. Bring back the old one please.

Ranchu

It's a pain in the hole trying to find anything on my phone.

_Whimsical_

Please bring back the old one! The old one was clear and intuitive, it was handy to use and it invited browsing through parts of boards I wouldn't normal bother with. The new one has made it impossible come across new forums by accident. Since it's changed I've visited my usual forums but there's no way I'd be bothered fiddling through those menus if I happened to be bored to see what else is there. It'll reduce traffic to smaller or niche forums too,like the Apple forum for example, that rely on people posting there if they've a particular issue they want help with because no ones going to even know those forums are there!

Into The Blue

Into The Blue wrote:

can zombie survival be moved to survivalisim and self sufficiency?

Ahem... Think this fell down the back of the couch and was forgotton about.. no hurry, Monday will do.

my3cents

Into The Blue wrote: »

Ahem... Think this fell down the back of the couch and was forgotton about.. no hurry, Monday will do.

Good because they are two different subjects.

Dozen Wicked Words

Think the General forum needs renaming. General what is not apparent until you read it.

http://touch.boards.ie/forum/113

Into The Blue

my3cents wrote: »

Good because they are two different subjects.

You're right.

Best leave well enough alone Dav.

Inquitus

Don't like it, it slows navigation and, as mentioned above, "talk to" and "adverts.ie" are not worthy of 2 of the 5 spots at the top of the page.

my3cents

Inquitus wrote: »

Don't like it, it slows navigation and, as mentioned above, "talk to" and "adverts.ie" are not worthy of 2 of the 5 spots at the top of the page.

The internet related "Talk to" forums also get a second mention under "Networking an Broadband" if thats right then why don't the companies representing Banking and Insurance also get a second mention under "Business and Finance"?

Dades

Sad Professor wrote: »

I’ll admit an alphabetical list isn’t good for browsing or discovering forums that you *might* like, but categories are no better since people will never think to look for many forums under a particular category. Okay so it’s nice to have all the tv forums grouped together, but categories like entertainment, society, social & fun, hobbies etc - I just don’t think people just don’t think in those terms.

I don't buy into that, tbh.

I honestly believe people will have far more chance of finding the correct forum for what they like by funnelling them into a catagory (with a properly designed dropdown, of course). An A-Z page would be an enormous and intimidating wall of text.

Sad Professor wrote: »

This is kind of what I was thinking alright. Though I think will probably work even better in the new layout, which is going to have a sidebar for charters, stickies, etc. Suggested forums would fit in nicely.

I do the idea of related forums, but I do hope that sidebar gets sent back to Hell whence it came! Screen estate on screens is far better served with actual talk, rather than a rarely used set of links on the side.

fred funk }{

Don't like it at all. Much slower to get where I want.

my3cents

Dades wrote: »

I don't buy into that, tbh.

I honestly believe people will have far more chance of finding the correct forum for what they like by funnelling them into a catagory (with a properly designed dropdown, of course). An A-Z page would be an enormous and intimidating wall of text.

I do the idea of related forums, but I do hope that sidebar gets sent back to Hell whence it came! Screen estate on screens is far better served with actual talk, rather than a rarely used set of links on the side.

That really is the problem for any system given the number of forums, there is just too much luck involved.

The real downside I can see for new users who have googled their way to a thread is that it may be hard for them to visualise what they have found. I don't really want a sidebar either but it is a way of letting new visitors know there is a whole lot more here to explore. Anyone finding the Talk to forums via google may not even see the new nav bar so have even less idea that there is a whole lot more going on.

If it is done I'd favour a side bar that is a default for new users but can be dismissed by logged in users.

Similarly I really do not want recommendations like Amazon, people that liked "after hours" also viewed .... or people that searched for gardening may also like ..... or other people viewing this forum are also viewing ..... unless its an option that can be switched off for logged on users.

fred funk }{ wrote: »

Don't like it at all. Much slower to get where I want.

Now you come to mention it finding forums from the new nav bar is slower even after a few days of use.

irishdude11

Websites aim to reduce the number clicks needed to navigate...here they have increased the number of clicks by putting everything a further layer down in the navigation menu, its hard to believe that someone actually came up with this great idea, and then that someone else actually oked it. I have found it a pain to use over the last few days, it just takes way longer to get around the place.

Insect Overlord

It's bizarre to see people complaining about clicking a mouse as if it's in the same league as digging a well and carrying water by the bucket load. Yer poor fingers couldn't possibly be getting overtired from the effort, like.

TheBody

An File wrote: »

It's bizarre to see people complaining about clicking a mouse as if it's in the same league as digging a well and carrying water by the bucket load. Yer poor fingers couldn't possibly be getting overtired from the effort, like.

It's not bizarre when there was a better system to begin with.

ThisRegard

An File wrote: »

It's bizarre to see people complaining about clicking a mouse as if it's in the same league as digging a well and carrying water by the bucket load. Yer poor fingers couldn't possibly be getting overtired from the effort, like.

Don't be a smart ass about out. Your ignorance is blatantly obvious too.

Zaph

OK folks, please keep things civil or cards and bans will have to be dished out, and I'm really not in the mood to be doing that. Thank you.

tracert

An File wrote: »

It's bizarre to see people complaining about clicking a mouse as if it's in the same league as digging a well and carrying water by the bucket load. Yer poor fingers couldn't possibly be getting overtired from the effort, like.

In terms of usability, the new navigation system is in the same league as digging a well and carrying water.

Before, you could hover over a category, click a forum.

Or you could hover over a category, hover over a subcategory, click a forum.

To stretch An File's metaphor, that was like going to the sink, turning on the tap, filling your glass of water.

If you opened the wrong category you could easily move back. Everything was accessible by moving the mouse.

Now you can hover over Topics, click a category, click a forum.

In the easiest case. Or you could have to hover over Topics, click a category, scroll down (!), click to open a subcategory, scroll down again (try getting to Recreations & Hobbies > Travel > Travel Reviews & Reports on a small screen), click to enter a forum.

That's 1 hover, 2 clicks and 2 scrolls to get to where you want to go compared to a 1, 2 or maximum 3 relatively frictionless hovers and one click to get to where you want to go using the old navigation bar.

If you opened the wrong category before, you could just scroll your mouse to the next category. Now you might have to scroll up past the category you just opened to click on another category.

The new categories are fine. Even having to hover over Topics to get to them could be fine. But putting so many extra steps in between the user and where they want to go is a step backwards in terms of usability.

Dyr

irishdude11 wrote: »

Websites aim to reduce the number clicks needed to navigate...here they have increased the number of clicks by putting everything a further layer down in the navigation menu, its hard to believe that someone actually came up with this great idea, and then that someone else actually oked it. I have found it a pain to use over the last few days, it just takes way longer to get around the place.

Get the impression here that the driving factor was funneling more traffic towards the commercial areas, talk to.. and adverts.ie

Or maybe just group think run wild. Wouldn't be the first time boards made decisions based on what everyone in the bunker agreed was best.

Dades

Bambi wrote: »

Wouldn't be the first time boards made decisions based on what everyone in the bunker agreed was best.

I suppose if you ran a company you'd let anyone with a passing interest decide what direction it should take? Goodwill won't keep the power on so the job of the people of Boards is to ensure the bills get paid.

As mentioned many times in this thread already, the current links at the top are temporary. The idea was to give users a chance to get used to reorganised catagories within a single dropdown. That dropdown will no doubt be tweaked before it is reintroduced as part of the complete redesign that has also been subject to a large feedback thread.