(Reasonable) Features you'd like to see implemented on RailUK Forums

[Peter Mugridge]

It is on the RailUK forums, which is what we're discussing.

I'm seeing it full width with hardly any margins at the sides? Therefore likely a setting on the specific computer?

↓↓↓↓↓

 

[gg1]

I'm seeing it full width with hardly any margins at the sides? Therefore likely a setting on the specific computer?

↓↓↓↓↓

View attachment 145070

Think it's more me and Haywain misunderstanding each other

post 144 - Haywain mentions a preference for not using the full width of the screen
146 - I say that's a feature I actively like about this forum and find it preferable to the current trend in certain other forums of leaving large empty spaces either side of the page
148 - Haywain says "Yes, and the browser window can be adjusted to suit one's preferences. A small empty space at each side is a very minor 'problem'."
149 - I initially read the second sentence of the above as referring to other forums since that's the context in which I raised the point.
150 - It's now clear to me Haywain was referring to this forum in post 148

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Think it's more me and Haywain misunderstanding each other

post 144 - Haywain mentions a preference for not using the full width of the screen
146 - I say that's a feature I actively like about this forum and find it preferable to the current trend in certain other forums of leaving large empty spaces either side of the page
148 - Haywain says "Yes, and the browser window can be adjusted to suit one's preferences. A small empty space at each side is a very minor 'problem'."
149 - I initially read the second sentence of the above as referring to other forums since that's the context in which I raised the point.
150 - It's now clear to me Haywain was referring to this forum in post 148

Ah... that makes sense.

Of course, any user can manually adjust the size of any window anyway - although getting the computer to "remember" your preference is another thing altogether. I tend to use full screen for every window and use the tabs to change between them.

 

[Haywain]

Think it's more me and Haywain misunderstanding each other

post 144 - Haywain mentions a preference for not using the full width of the screen

I'm not sure there was that much to misunderstand - my post #144 was a response to your previous commnets:

It seems to be the only thing shown in the 1cm block to the right of the window.

Personally, I would rather have more text, so I can reduce the size of the window. If I need to get to the top of the page, I can press the Home button on the keyboard.

That was clearly referring to this forum.

 

[bspahh]

That was clearly referring to this forum.

Yes, I was referring to this forum.

The blank bit to the right of the window disappears if I reduce the width of the window.

A few years ago, my employer hired a specialist user interface designer. He didn't last long. One of his few enduring impacts is a 150 pixel wide border to a WWW page which only showed a button to scroll to the top of the page, which he was adamant that was essential for an easy to use interface, even though the rest of the page was horribly complicated, so I had to open other windows to work out what it meant.

It means I have a personal prejudice against controls like this navigate in a WWW page. I'll get by

 

[Techniquest]

I have just found (or noticed) an "up" button which appears at the bottom RHS of my screen when I start to move up a thread... Has this always been here? It's very useful, and if it is an innovation, thank you!

I had not noticed that until your post, so immediately had a look and yes! It is there and while I don't often have a need for it, I will certainly find it useful Thanks for pointing it out!

 

[jh64]

My request is a very small one, literally! I'd like to see a higher resolution favicon for the forum. It's not world ending, but the chunky pixels are noticeable on more pixel-dense displays like most laptops, phones and tablets. I've included a cropped screenshot of how the current icon appears on my iPad, along with the similar circular icons for the Guardian and Reddit as comparison.

 

[MasterSpenny]

I would quite like to see an option where you can react to a post made. So like a line above the username and profile picture, it shows something like ‘Reacted to by (username)’.

If I were an administrator I would make it go towards the user’s reaction score. And to make sure it makes sense, I would have the score increase for good reactions, and down for bad reactions.

 

[skyhigh]

I would quite like to see an option where you can react to a post made. So like a line above the username and profile picture, it shows something like ‘Reacted to by (username)’.

This has already been discussed and discounted in the last couple of pages.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Why when rapidly replying on one thread I am restricted by time posting on another? It is particularly annoying having to wait up to 15 seconds to post a reply especially on quizzes.

 

[ainsworth74]

Why when rapidly replying on one thread I am restricted by time posting on another? It is particularly annoying having to wait up to 15 seconds to post a reply especially on quizzes.

Part of the anti-spam measures and also to encourage taking time to think about ones contributions!

 

[Ashley Hill]

Part of the anti-spam measures and also to encourage taking time to think about ones contributions!

Thanks.

 

[JD2168]

An idea I thought of was a sub heading in the Buses & Coaches thread for Preservation of Buses similar to the Train preservation threads.

 

[317 forever]

The software the Forum runs on is XenForo which is indeed a paid of piece of software but I am led to believe is pretty customisable it's just that sometime features require the purchase of a paid for add-ons (or the commissioning of an add-on) rather than just being a setting that can be changed. The hosting of the website is separate to the forum software itself.

I wonder whether avforums uses the same software? It also displays number of unread alerts and the option of reading the pages of unread posts before the 3 or more most posts.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

I wonder whether avforums uses the same software? It also displays number of unread alerts and the option of reading the pages of unread posts before the 3 or more most posts.

It does, you can see it at the bottom of pages on this forum and that one (just search "xenforo")

 

[nw1]

The problem arises for those of us who didn't ever "double post" but would sometimes make two totally unrelated posts - unrelated, that is, save for their both coming under the common heading of the thread. It was irritating to find that some automaton merged these posts. The work-around, to which I have now become accustomed, is to put a signifier like a line across in front of the second post so that the difference is clear. It's the way in which automation interferes with something well thought out that is annoying. But it's trivial and not something I'm campaigning to change, there are far more important things. If I had a vote, I'd vote to get rid of it. That's all.

EDIT It reminds me of the last time I played chess on a computer, which was on OS/2 so clearly a long time ago. I'm not a good player but I think I know most of the rules. I thought about my next move carefully and made it, thinking that the "obvious" response from the computer was not possible, but the computer went and illegally made it (it involved castling across check if I remember correctly) so I gave up in disgust. It felt like the computer was penalising me for doing the right thing. I think "automerge" in the same way - the computer makes decisions which over-ride something I've thought about properly, so it's about penalising those who do the right thing. But I'm now going on about it as if it's of major importance to me, and it really isn't, it's of minor annoyance to me and the vast majority of things done to run this forum well are positive and very much appreciated.

+1, I'd like to ideally see the end of, or at least a modification of, auto-merge.

It's often the case that you post on one thread, then post a few days later on the same thread on another topic.

This might be the case, for instance, on a thread which you are one of a relatively small number of people that post frequently.

There should ideally be a time limit on it which expires after a few hours. That would prevent the same person making multiple posts on basically the same topic, but would also allow the same person to post on a different topic some time later as an entirely separate post.

Again like @jfollows it's just a minor annoyance to me too.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I'd like to be able to find my individual posts on a thread; at the moment I can see how many posts I have posted on a given thread, but cannot find them without trawling the whole thread.

This would be most useful on the photographic quiz threads - a couple of years ago I managed to post a picture I'd already posted on the same thread a long time previously... which I'd forgotten about...

 

[bspahh]

I'd like to be able to find my individual posts on a thread; at the moment I can see how many posts I have posted on a given thread, but cannot find them without trawling the whole thread.

This would be most useful on the photographic quiz threads - a couple of years ago I managed to post a picture I'd already posted on the same thread a long time previously... which I'd forgotten about...

If you press the Search button in the top right corner of the window, change to search from "Everywhere" to "This thread", enter your username in the By: text box and press Search it will give you a list of your posts on the current thread:

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Ah.... thank you...

 

[MasterSpenny]

+1, I'd like to ideally see the end of, or at least a modification of, auto-merge.

It's often the case that you post on one thread, then post a few days later on the same thread on another topic.

This might be the case, for instance, on a thread which you are one of a relatively small number of people that post frequently.

There should ideally be a time limit on it which expires after a few hours. That would prevent the same person making multiple posts on basically the same topic, but would also allow the same person to post on a different topic some time later as an entirely separate post.

Again like @jfollows it's just a minor annoyance to me too.

The idea of automerge isn’t very good at all, as the thread will not be moved up. Then why does automerge not happen in the Photography Sites, Blogs & Videos section? I just posted my latest video there and none of it has automerged (look at all the posts there).

How long is it before the post doesn’t merge with the last post made on that thread?

As there was only one route at the end of operation at Metroline’s Hayes garage, in this video I explain three routes that previously operated. The other previous routes will be in the next video.

 

[jfollows]

How long is it before the post doesn’t merge with the last post made on that thread?

28 days I believe (https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/forum-upgrade-complete.203292/page-7)
EDIT NO, it was subsequently changed to 7 days, read on in the thread I linked to.

 

[Haywain]

EDIT NO, it was subsequently changed to 7 days, read on in the thread I linked to.

But evidently not for @MasterSpenny in the thread they linked to.

 

[ainsworth74]

There are some sections of the Forum where it is not enabled due to the nature of that section being a little different and therefore bumping is not considered to be such an issue. The photo/video blogs section is one of them. I can't recall the others off hand!

 

[stadler]

I agree that auto merge feature can be very annoying when you make a post and then make another post a few days later that is unrelated. If the admins want to keep the auto merge feature then could it be reduced from 7 days to 24 hours. I think within 24 hours any new post would be significantly different. So maybe it could be reduced from 7 days to 24 hours.

 

[90sWereBetter]

I appreciate it probably isn't possible, but I'd like to see the off-topic rule softened a bit, sometimes decent discussions which have branched onto a slightly different but related subject (for example comparisons of different bus operators) end up being cut off at the roots or sent into a new thread because it's no longer entirely about the original topic, which doesn't feel quite right or organic to me.

As a veteran of Formula 1 and professional wrestling forums when off-topic irreverence tends to be encouraged, it is a bit of a culture shock coming here sometimes! I appreciate why the rule is in place (otherwise every thread would end up about the Strategic Steam Reserve or possible reuses of Class 442s ), but perhaps a bit more leniency would go a long way towards goodwill.

By all means moderate away when there's any mention of Box Tunnel in a discussion about C2C or London Buses

 

[jfollows]

I appreciate it probably isn't possible, but I'd like to see the off-topic rule softened a bit, sometimes decent discussions which have branched onto a slightly different but related subject (for example comparisons of different bus operators) end up being cut off at the roots or sent into a new thread because it's no longer entirely about the original topic, which doesn't feel quite right or organic to me.

For what it's worth, I don't agree with you; I think the balance struck by the moderators is spot-on here.
Firstly, I'm only too guilty of wandering off the subject myself, and I try and avoid doing so.
Secondly, there are topic threads which become utterly tedious with irrelevant discussion from time to time, and it would be worse if it weren't stopped.
Finally, there's always an open invitation to start a new thread on the new topic.
Obviously it's a matter of opinion and interpretation, but I'm happy with the status quo.

 

[ainsworth74]

I appreciate it probably isn't possible, but I'd like to see the off-topic rule softened a bit, sometimes decent discussions which have branched onto a slightly different but related subject (for example comparisons of different bus operators) end up being cut off at the roots or sent into a new thread because it's no longer entirely about the original topic, which doesn't feel quite right or organic to me.

It's a tricky balance! We did actually undertake a Forum Rules consultation a year ago and one of the conclusions we reached was:

Finally there were some comments regarding off-topic posting and a feeling that sometimes we're too quick to act. We've taken the comments on board but feedback via this survey and elsewhere (Forum Meets/Meals are often a good place to provide us with feedback face to face!) is that we generally strike the right balance. A few people even think we're not strict enough on off-topic posting!

I haven't got the precise number to hand but it was something like 90% though the existing rule was "Just Right". But we are alive to the issue and there are often debates "behind the curtain" regarding it.

 

[edwin_m]

To me the degree of "off-topic" moderation needed depends on the topic itself. Topics about construction updates should stick strictly to that, and perhaps whenever one of these is created a corresponding speculative topic should be created too to catch the inevitable deviations. But when the topic is a project in the early stages of development, but "official" rather than speculative, then I suggest its OK to let it wander into speculative territory in terms of how it might be implemented.

 

[Crossover]

I agree that auto merge feature can be very annoying when you make a post and then make another post a few days later that is unrelated. If the admins want to keep the auto merge feature then could it be reduced from 7 days to 24 hours. I think within 24 hours any new post would be significantly different. So maybe it could be reduced from 7 days to 24 hours.

Within a few days is exactly what the feature is (to my knowledge) intended to be there for - if someone posts a topic and doesn't get any response (for whatever reason), then a new post may be made such as "Bump" leading to it showing as updated but adding nothing to the party

 

[Statto]

I hate the auto merge feature too, it's annoying when you make an unrelated post, even minutes after you posted previous post & they merge.

Oh, fixing bumping threads by the means of "bump", is very easy, by making bumping threads, but not contributing to the discussion, against the forum rules.