What has happened to the forum????

[Dear Wiggo]

For the love of DOG can you please acknowledge I am not going to spam the board and let me post quicker than once a minute or whatever the timeout is and please if not then display how long I have to wait.

Thanks.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Since this is a beta site - how do I go back to the normal site - you know the one where you can actually read the text on screen without a *** microscope?

 

[Archibald]

Re:

For the love of DOG can you please acknowledge I am not going to spam the board and let me post quicker than once a minute or whatever the timeout is and please if not then display how long I have to wait.

Thanks.

and get the [size] of your signature working?

 

[sam]

Re:

Since this is a beta site - how do I go back to the normal site - you know the one where you can actually read the text on screen without a *** microscope?

Could you reset your browser cache, depending on your browser its shift + Refresh.

if that fails to increase the font - please send me a screenshot of the problem font and we will investigate further.

as lots of changes have been made quickly since the launch some style changes don't get picked up immediately by the browser.

 

[sam]

Re:

PM's working? What is up with the outbox? Does that mean message sent?

it will sit in the outbox until its sent. just like email.

 

[Chris]

Re: Re:

This forum feels like an early beta game nowdays.. users are beta testers lol

How could you not test the forum before updating it? Even giving it access to moderators..I can't comprehand

Would make sense,as something similar to that was done before the new website was released.

The forum was tested thoroughly and there was a lot fixed before we released. Unfortunately though due to us having to release when we did, there were a fair few raised issues still outstanding. I think the majority of user complaints since release were about issues we already had fixes planned for.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

PM's working? What is up with the outbox? Does that mean message sent?

it will sit in the outbox until its sent. just like email.

I had 2 PMs sitting in my outbox for an eternity but at least one of them was sent because I got a reply (while it was still in outbox)

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Not sure why people are annoyed that a 3000x3000 image gets resized to something more managable.
Used to hate it when someone put up some monster sized pic that took up the entire screen and then some, that then stretched the entire page and every post on it off the screen.
Resizing makes perfect sense.

But that's not what it does. There is no auto resize (apparently because it slows the site) so you can't post pics over 1200x1000 pixels. I don't think anyone would complain about auto resizing.

 

[Pete]

I had 2 PMs sitting in my outbox for an eternity but at least one of them was sent because I got a reply (while it was still in outbox)

phpBB forums are a little confusing with PMs. A message will show as being in your outbox until it's actually been read by the recipient, and there's sometimes a delay on registering it being read (in your case, getting a reply quicker than the update to say it's been read). It is an issue with how that's communicated to users (I'm not sure if it's something we can change), but PMs are working fine currently.

But that's not what it does. There is no auto resize (apparently because it slows the site) so you can't post pics over 1200x1000 pixels. I don't think anyone would complain about auto resizing.

There is an auto resize, but there is also a limit to the images you can link to in the first place. What you have to bear in mind is that even when the forum resizes the image on the page, this is just a visual thing to stop it running off the side of the page. Your browser would still have to load the original sized image (3000x3000), so it would still impact the load time of the page. The 1200x1000px restriction is not just to do with how it looks on the page, it's to prevent people linking to images so large that they impact the experience of other users with slower connections.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Guys, two things.

Repeat request - could you please enable commas to separate large numbers on replies and topic views? 1,234,567 reads much easier than 1234567.

Is it really necessary for the "reply" button in PMs to be hidden? I can think of no rational reason why, in view of the number of buttons on every page, the "reply" should be hidden. If you don't move your cursor over the relevant part of the page, you don't even see a "reply" button, which is patently ridiculous.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Guys, two things.

Repeat request - could you please enable commas to separate large numbers on replies and topic views? 1,234,567 reads much easier than 1234567.

Is it really necessary for the "reply" button in PMs to be hidden? I can think of no rational reason why, in view of the number of buttons on every page, the "reply" should be hidden. If you don't move your cursor over the relevant part of the page, you don't even see a "reply" button, which is patently ridiculous.

Need to highlight this as I wasn't even aware there was a reply button and have been replying with quote to everything. I assumed it must be somewhere but I just couldn't find it, seems this is why.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

There is an auto resize, but there is also a limit to the images you can link to in the first place. What you have to bear in mind is that even when the forum resizes the image on the page, this is just a visual thing to stop it running off the side of the page. Your browser would still have to load the original sized image (3000x3000), so it would still impact the load time of the page. The 1200x1000px restriction is not just to do with how it looks on the page, it's to prevent people linking to images so large that they impact the experience of other users with slower connections.

This is actually extremely appreciated, by me at least. My home connection is not very quick and large images can mean me thinking the browser has crashed as they load, they cause a massive variation in speed from page to page that can be confusing and frustrating.

 

[Netserk]

Tbh I now think that how images work are better than they were before. I still think there are quite some things that need to be fixed, but it is very nice that there also are actual improvements. Thanks for that.

Personally I'd prefer if the width of the posts (where there is text) was as wide as previously. I understand that the difference is because user information is on the left side of the post instead of being over it and that the sum of it is as wide as before. However it is the width of the text area that matters to me and also that it is centred instead of being out of balance as it is currently. I don't know if this can be fixed with the new software or if the majority wants it to be fixed. Just my opinion.

To have each and every post in a thread numbered and linkable (as before) would also be very nice. I don't know if it's possible to make old links to posts and threads redirect to the new url, but it would really mean a lot if that could happen. That way the over one thousand of library links in the Race Design Thread (and other threads as well) wouldn't have to be replaced.

Currently we can see which threads how unread posts in them (which I am grateful for coupled with the New Posts feature), but inside the threads we can't see on the posts whether or not they are unread. I guess that it would be possible to change that, and while it isn't a big problem (or even close to it), it is something that would be nice.

Finally I do think it is fine with the orange buttons to match the colour of the website, but I did prefer the previous colour scheme. Especially less white would be nice, and perhaps a little more purple.

Cheers.

 

[Microchip]

This may sound repetitive, but I'll ask anyway - can you please change the font 100% throughout the Forum, if possible? The titles are not streamlined with the details.



Also, there used to be "Alt" text when you place the mouse over the title. It would reproduce the first poster's comment, partially.

 

[Microchip]

I'm curious about the change of software for the forum. Cycling News and DV Info are (were) the two best forums I've ever come across. Readability is (was) superb. Layout and features excellent.

What is happening now is that a new application is being used which has to be renovated to look virtually like the original forum.

 

[Pete]

This may sound repetitive, but I'll ask anyway - can you please change the font 100% throughout the Forum, if possible? The titles are not streamlined with the details.

Could you give us some more details about the browser / operating system and versions you're using, please? I would suggest a cache clear, if you hadn't already gone through that with Chris, as your fonts are rather different to what you should be seeing:

Also, there used to be "Alt" text when you place the mouse over the title. It would reproduce the first poster's comment, partially.

I can definitely look into that, though can't promise it's possible.

 

[Pete]

I'm curious about the change of software for the forum.

Very simply, it was a number of technical / security issues that were causing problems with login and the main Cyclingnews.com site, as well as data protection concerns with user information. The previous forum software had a very cumbersome and problematic upgrade path that we weren't even sure would address the issues, so we moved to a different platform which has improved many things behind-the-scenes.

Unfortunately the two forum platforms are not entirely comparable one-to-one in terms of end-user features, and users are understandably going to miss the things they're used to. We're trying to rectify that wherever we can, though it's not going to be possible to get every feature working exactly like it was previously. Hopefully the increased stability, security, and features we'll be able to support in the future will make up for the change over time.

 

[Microchip]

Re:

Could you give us some more details about the browser / operating system and versions you're using, please? I would suggest a cache clear, if you hadn't already gone through that with Chris, as your fonts are rather different to what you should be seeing:

I'm using Chrome Version 41.0.2272.89 m & Firefox 36.0.1. I just cleared the cache in both of them, but am still seeing the old fonts.

Interesting details about the change of application for the forum. I understand it and in due time, it'll all be fine. Better not to have a headache (migraine) behind the scenes fighting up with the software!

 

[Pete]

Re:

Repeat request - could you please enable commas to separate large numbers on replies and topic views? 1,234,567 reads much easier than 1234567.

Done. It's not a very developer-friendly process in the back end, so if you spot somewhere I've missed that's not been comma separated then please let me know.

Is it really necessary for the "reply" button in PMs to be hidden? I can think of no rational reason why, in view of the number of buttons on every page, the "reply" should be hidden. If you don't move your cursor over the relevant part of the page, you don't even see a "reply" button, which is patently ridiculous.

Hmmm, looks like an unintentional side effect of something else. Should now be fixed.

 

[lemon cheese cake]

Race Design Thread will be all goes once we can get single post view. Looking good.

Following on from this, are we going to be able to get single post view, and if so, what's the timeframe on getting the go-live on it?

Can we please have something back about this. Any forum member that has asked about this had nothing in reply. So, i'll ask it again, are we going to have single post and if so how long will it take for it to be put into use.

 

[Pete]

It's being looked at, but no timeframe I'm afraid.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Re: Re:

Repeat request - could you please enable commas to separate large numbers on replies and topic views? 1,234,567 reads much easier than 1234567.

Done. It's not a very developer-friendly process in the back end, so if you spot somewhere I've missed that's not been comma separated then please let me know.

Is it really necessary for the "reply" button in PMs to be hidden? I can think of no rational reason why, in view of the number of buttons on every page, the "reply" should be hidden. If you don't move your cursor over the relevant part of the page, you don't even see a "reply" button, which is patently ridiculous.

Hmmm, looks like an unintentional side effect of something else. Should now be fixed.

Thanks Pete, numbers are good now, reply button in PM still hidden.

 

[Pete]

Try a cache refresh (numbers change is server side, PM buttons will be client side). See below.

 

[MacRoadie2.0]

Re: Re:

So, after multiple attempts to get a new password in order to use my old member account (3 emails to be exact), I have now given up and created a whole new account.

Not only is the forum a mess, but you can't even get a response to emails after two weeks of waiting. Nice service there guys.

where did you send an email? did you use the FEEDBACK button on the bottom left of the site?

No, I used the "Feedback" link that was included in the original email telling me I needed a new password. Seemed like the logical (?) way to do it.

I have now also sent a message using the link you suggested.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

Since this is a beta site - how do I go back to the normal site - you know the one where you can actually read the text on screen without a *** microscope?

Could you reset your browser cache, depending on your browser its shift + Refresh.

if that fails to increase the font - please send me a screenshot of the problem font and we will investigate further.

as lots of changes have been made quickly since the launch some style changes don't get picked up immediately by the browser.

Thanks and my apologies for my language before.

It's larger now, but now I can see why people have been complaining about the font choice. Can that be changed? It's not a particularly readable font. Quite hard on the eyes. It's little too narrow perhaps.