What if ...

[MAC]

that is an issue - how surveys are designed

but it does give some information on the reaction

Information on the reaction has to be correct, not just some.

polls are never correct, where you been

I think folks will linger for a while, but less traffic could spiral into less participation

I've suggested that they keep the existing forum for the heavier sites, and link the new forum in for photo posting, mobile, computer, and lower traffic sites.

So basically you are suggesting two sites instead of one, correct? In this case who is going to pay for the hosting and maintaining two sites. They are seeking among other goals to reduce cost.

not correct, never said run two forums forever, but test the revenue waters before pulling the plug

reduce costs and

grow traffic revenue

 

[robert1955]

If you want to see a site using XenForo you can look at Camaraderie.org and M-43.com looks as if it uses the same platform. I will leave any readers of this post to make their own observations.

Thanks. I looked at https://cameraderie.org/which really looks nice with the black background. The info about the poster is nicely limited, with a bit more if you click on their avatar / icon. There is probably more when you're logged in

One nice detail: the post sequence number in the upper right corner, might come in handy

 

[Sagittarius]

that is an issue - how surveys are designed

but it does give some information on the reaction

Information on the reaction has to be correct, not just some.

polls are never correct, where you been

Then why did you refer to the poll?

I think folks will linger for a while, but less traffic could spiral into less participation

I've suggested that they keep the existing forum for the heavier sites, and link the new forum in for photo posting, mobile, computer, and lower traffic sites.

So basically you are suggesting two sites instead of one, correct? In this case who is going to pay for the hosting and maintaining two sites. They are seeking among other goals to reduce cost.

not correct, never said run two forums forever, but test the revenue waters before pulling the plug

reduce costs and

grow traffic revenue

Read above what you said. You never said anything about temporary testing.

But anyway lets agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[MAC]

with threaded view, you can ignore those posters and subtopics, with flat view in a long you'll be scrolling, and scrolling, and scrolling, and reading stuff you wish you had threaded view so you the flat view format is not how humans debate and interact.

the danger is less posts, less participation, less traffic, less revenue, less offerings

imo discipline may have high costs for a free site that depends on hits and gems.

You are continuously repeating the same believe that threaded is more effective,

not true, I think a combination of threaded, and flat are more effective. I belong to a forum that has only flat and for long threads it becomes unwieldy.

lead to having to read only what you wanted to read but also guaranteeing you will see gems.

I never said it guaranteed me finding gems.

This is just not true.

of course it is not true, you made it up to fit your narrative

You are mistakenly assuming you are able to always click on the best posts, or you are clicking clicking clicking.

you should quit using untrue absolutes like always and guaranteeing

I've known many forum members for 15 + years and with threaded view I can connect with their conversations in seconds

You also keep repeating that in flat you have to read everthing.

I didn't say everything, of course I can skim, but I want to dive into the part of the long thread I'm interested in just seconds to follow the conversations between multiple members that can be conducted in threaded view

Apparently you are unable or unwilliing to skim. Not to mention the use of the ignore function.

not true - for short threads, flat view is fine

I doubt all or most threatening to abandon ship will actually keep their promise

we shall see

All this makes me more doubtful about the desirability of offering the two views on one site.

the proof of the pudding will be hit counts - traffic before the change and traffic after the change

being a part of both types of forums, for me it will be a downgrade for long threads

YMMV

 

[Ozzie SD]

with threaded view, you can ignore those posters and subtopics, with flat view in a long you'll be scrolling, and scrolling, and scrolling, and reading stuff you wish you had threaded view so you the flat view format is not how humans debate and interact.

the danger is less posts, less participation, less traffic, less revenue, less offerings

imo discipline may have high costs for a free site that depends on hits and gems.

You are continuously repeating the same believe that threaded is more effective, lead to having to read only what you wanted to read but also guaranteeing you will see gems. This is just not true.

Actually it IS true. Just read this post to understand why many people prefer threaded view. You may feel otherwise, no problem, but please don't say that someone else is not telling the truth. Yours and mine 'truth' can be different, because we see things different, have a different perspective and value different things. Let's just be respectful to one another.

You are mistakenly assuming you are able to always click on the best posts, or you are clicking clicking clicking.

You also keep repeating that in flat you have to read everthing. Apparently you are unable or unwilliing to skim. Not to mention the use of the ignore function.

I doubt all or most threatening to abandon ship will actually keep their promise

Many will. They will become readers from the sideline instead of active participants.

All this makes me more doubtful about the desirability of offering the two views on one site.

That sounds quite selfish to be honest. Best would have been both flat and threaded view so everyone would have been happy.

 

[mfinley]

You also keep repeating that in flat you have to read everthing.

I didn't say everything, of course I can skim, but I want to dive into the part of the long thread I'm interested in just seconds to follow the conversations between multiple members that can be conducted in threaded view

I don’t want to interrupt another quote war, but I learned a helpful secret for reading those 150-reply mega threads and it works with threaded or flat view. Most of those long threads follow the same pattern:

• The first 20–30 replies are on topic, and contribute something new and interesting.
• After that, the discussion devolves into a quote duel, with people dissecting and arguing each sentence of the other's reply line by line, and in the end nobody changes anybody's mind.
• Eventually, the thread either wanders back on topic, fizzles out, or gets closed by a moderator.

So the trick is simple, read the first 20–30 replies, skip the middle, and jump to the end to see if the conversation recovered. If it didn’t, move on. Works in threaded or flat view.

You can skip the middle of 70-80% of any long threads and never miss anything.

 

[Overrank]

You also keep repeating that in flat you have to read everthing.

I didn't say everything, of course I can skim, but I want to dive into the part of the long thread I'm interested in just seconds to follow the conversations between multiple members that can be conducted in threaded view

I don’t want to interrupt another quote war, but I learned a helpful secret for reading those 150-reply mega threads and it works with threaded or flat view. Most of those long threads follow the same pattern:

• The first 20–30 replies are on topic, and contribute something new and interesting.

And if the OP is a first time user they probably left after the fifth message

• After that, the discussion devolves into a quote duel, with people dissecting and arguing each sentence of the other's reply line by line, and in the end nobody changes anybody's mind.
• Eventually, the thread either wanders back on topic, fizzles out, or gets closed by a moderator.

So the trick is simple, read the first 20–30 replies, skip the middle, and jump to the end to see if the conversation recovered. If it didn’t, move on. Works in threaded or flat view.

You can skip the middle of 70-80% of any long threads and never miss anything.

 

[robert1955]

I don’t want to interrupt another quote war, but I learned a helpful secret for reading those 150-reply mega threads and it works with threaded or flat view. Most of those long threads follow the same pattern:

• The first 20–30 replies are on topic, and contribute something new and interesting.
• After that, the discussion devolves into a quote duel, with people dissecting and arguing each sentence of the other's reply line by line, and in the end nobody changes anybody's mind.
• Eventually, the thread either wanders back on topic, fizzles out, or gets closed by a moderator.

So the trick is simple, read the first 20–30 replies, skip the middle, and jump to the end to see if the conversation recovered. If it didn’t, move on. Works in threaded or flat view.

You can skip the middle of 70-80% of any long threads and never miss anything.

Good strategy. Not many threads are long anyway [nowadays?], but I found a nice example here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4816921

A lens test, always a contentious subject.
If I were a Z user [subscribed to that forum] I would probably start reading on its first day.

Initially most comments were about flaws in the testing. Then, in the middle of page 2 the OP wrote he had gone to the store, tested another one and got an exchange.

Note that he did not change the title of his post [as most posters did not when they strayed from the original topic]. This led to several posters missing this [IMHO probably because using threaded].

This led to a branch about Nikon QC, again without title change. Well within your 25 posts limit. If I were interested I would have unsubsribed here. But the thread went on about QC and handheld testing until 149, with spmeone obviously wanting the last word showing it had not improved.

For this post I had to switch from F ot T several times. A problem with that is that you can switch from F to T only at the top or bottom of a page. To pinpoint the crucial message from the OP I had to go to his posting history.