Poll: Three weeks later, what do you think of the new design?

[Joe Link]

So, it's been three weeks since we made the jump from vBulletin to XenForo. I'd like to get feedback from everyone as to what they like, what they don't like, what we should work on, etc.

Here is my current to-do list, so please keep in mind we're still working on many things here. These are not in order.

- Add additional smileys
- Develop floating login/registration bar
- Disable large ads on mobile devices and improve style
- Re-add member card trader link
- Develop add-on to allow members to see all deletion/moderation actions
- Fix TapaTalk search issue
- Fix classified prefix behavior

I appreciate your feedback!

Read More

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

Get rid of the requirement to make a post to complete registration. While this may add a minimal amount of extra activity it also clutters the forum with garbage posts.

 

[jonn5335]

Joe, I think I can speak for a large majority of NWFA users when I say that I appreciate how your are always making sacrifices to make NWFA a better place for everyone. You are truly making a sense of community online (which is even more rare). I have meet a lot of good people on here and even made some good friends. Thank you Joe I appreciate you and what you are doing here very much.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

I also would encourage the team to allow political and controversial posts provided they do not devolve into attacks. What is currently happening is that there is no clear policy being enforced. I've personally seen at least one thread locked because it did not explicitly refer to firearms even though it is the one tool that all of us can use to protect the right to keep and bear firearms. I.E. By voting. Every member of the forum that can vote should be both registered and should be voting as that is the one peaceful means we have to maintain that right. On the other hand I see a thread that has apparently been going on for a long time that has nothing to do with firearms. It might also be worth noting that these controversial threads actually tend to increase traffic and participation and therefore it would be to the benefit of the NWFA corporation to allow them. When they should be moderated should not be based on content but rather on when they become personal attacks.

 

[Mark W.]

Firearms based discussion only PLEASE.

 

[CHLChris]

The longer lists of threads in each forum is really nice, and allows for more threads to be visible on the first page. I like that convenience.

I know my focus on bumping is near pathological, but... I rather liked how the old system required a post in our own thread, after the requisite # of days, to bump it. That way, I could just look at the last post to determine when my time was up to bump. Now I have to click on "bump" to see the error msg to figure out the time left. Which brings me to #2. The error messages, which now make enough sense to figure out, are still in a very odd format. "05d seconds" instead of just "5 days" --and-- "Please try again after 01d 12:05:34 seconds" instead of "Please try again after 1 day 12:05:34." For some reason, Joe, the focus on seconds just messes with my brain. The old system simply showed a continuous countdown clock at the top of our own threads. I'm not sure that is necessary, but was very cool.

It has taken a bit to get used to the Start a Convo, but I rather like it! I'm guessing this means people won't be having full PM boxes any more. Though many people may have difficulty getting used to it, I think it is far superior!!

 

[spectra]

Change is not good But am getting used to it. I have not been on the board as much lately as I was in the past but am getting used to things.

Yes we do need more smiles

 

[coosbaycreep]

I'm glad it works with tapatalk now, but I still liked the old nwfa much better. I'm still finding it slow and difficult to navigate. Change is bad.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

Firearms based discussion only PLEASE.

Then the political and legal forum should be removed completely. It is impossible to have a political forum and keep it to firearms based discussion because the topics involved cross over into each other so much. The result is that there is no consistent enforcement as it is too subjective. Pick any two people here and you will get two different viewpoints as to what is and is not firearm related. The result is impossible to maintain.

 

[Mark W.]

Bills that deal with firearms being discussed or voted on at the state capital or in Washington or even some other state capital are all appropriate. Stories about someone being arrested for guns at NY NY airport or some other legal action that directly relates to firearms is appropriate.

Invitations to gun rallies appropriate

Crap about Obama care and the NSA looking in your phone logs . And anything that needs a tin foil hat to understand the point is not Firearms related

ETC.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

Bills that deal with firearms being discussed or voted on at the state capital or in Washington or even some other state capital are all appropriate. Stories about someone being arrested for guns at NY NY airport or some other legal action that directly relates to firearms is appropriate.

Invitations to gun rallies appropriate

Crap about Obama care and the NSA looking in your phone logs . And anything that needs a tin foil hat to understand the point is not Firearms related

ETC.

And this is where the problem lies. Each person has their own opinion of what is firearm related. While I think there is a lot of tin foil hat stuff it is also too easy to see that as an argument against anything that doesn't seem to be mainstream. A year ago anyone that was upset with Obama's policies was categorized as such when today mainstream agrees. At what point do you draw that line between them? And how do you draw a line so that everyone can see it the same? Unfortunately you cannot. Either you accept that the line is going to cross over to other subjects or you draw the line to eliminate all of it. Off Topic would imply that all posts unrelated to firearms go there and yet the forum is limited to firearm related topics. Political would imply the same. It's sending a mixed message to members. Either allow it or take them away and don't. Makes no difference to me but the confusion should be taken away either way as it creates more problems than it fixes.

 

[Velzey]

It's 100% better than that old windows 95 era website !!!

Runs fast on everything I have, no glitches so far!


Thank you!!

 

[RVTECH]

I like it . No issues other than (and it may sound trivial BUT) I wish the term 'conversation' had not replaced 'message' Yea, I know it's a personal thing but the word 'conversation' denotes verbal, face - to - face communication, whereas 'message' (or messaging) relates more to email, PMs etc. Oh I'll get over it but this is my feedback!

 

[etrain16]

I really like the new site far better than the old one - it feels up to date now!

Regarding the discussion on political conversation, I feel the same way as I do on other forums I've been on over the years. If a discussion comes up that I'm not interested in, I simply ignore it. Yes, there is the occasional weird topic that comes from left-field that really doesn't seem to apply to firearms, but it hardly clutters the board in such a way that the firearms discussions fall into the background.

I prefer to keep the opportunity for discussion open. Even if a topic isn't directly firearms related, it's interesting to me to see what the pro-firearms community may have to say on other topics. Public education and healthcare topics, while not necessarily directly firearms related, may in fact have an important impact in the firearms community. This is a private forum, not a public space, so the 1st amendment doesn't really apply. But I do believe strongly in allowing the same freedom of speech that the 1st gives us, even in this format. And that's hard to do when people bring up topics we don't necessarily like, agree with or may even want to read. Freedom tends to be a bit messy and dirty. I'd say unless someone is 'attacking' the site by intentionally posting thread after thread of off-topic stuff in the attempt to shut down firearms conversation, or if a topic gets to the point of someone making threats, the off-topic stuff has a place. I'm perfectly comfortable using my own ability to ignore those threads I'm not interested in myself. It's easy to do. I will always prefer that over shutting down conversations.

I don't know about the rest of you, but my interests stretch beyond just firearms. I don't want to have to find a separate forum for every conceivable topic. I like to know what my fellow firearms enthusiasts think on a wide variety of different topics. I say let them continue, foil hats and all. That's my 2 cents.

 

[orygun]

I think it was easier to navigate the old system because it was a simpler format. However checking out pics in an ad, or putting pics in an ad I'm posting is a much smoother process now.
Also, love the conversations compared to the old system. I used to have to start a new message because the previous ones kept piling up.
I don't like the way bumps are done either. Got no clue as to when it was bumped last, either by the little window or from last bump post. I think the ads are much cleaner without having to post a bump, but it would be nice if there was a way to instantly tell when it's ok to bump it.
Miss seeing join date in the avatar. Oh, yeah. More similes please.
Overall, nice upgrade. I just keep poking around to figger stuff out.

 

[orygun]

But how come my feed back doesn't show?

 

[etrain16]

But how come my feed back doesn't show?

I see your feedback right now.

 

[orygun]

I see your feedback right now.

Cool. I don't, and I don't know where to find it in my profile.

Found it! Trading stats....

Yep, just keep pokin around.

 

[raindog]

The old site didn't seem broken to me. But the new site seems OK.

Haven't been here in a while and see you've moved to Xenforo. Of the majors, that's my least-favorite BB system. VB is the old familiar - not exciting but everyone knows it so it's familiar. I prefer IP.Board which is lot nicer to work with on either the admin or user side. Xenforo is undistinguished between the two (as a user). Sort of halfway between VB and IPB with no real advantage over either.

But that's just one guy's opinion. The new site certainly works and looks good.

Specific to NWFA:

- There's a large amount of whitespace on each page. I see less "info per screenful" than the old site. All the borders, spacing, bigger pictures, etc, chew up a lot of valuable screen content. I'd prefer a "denser" site. For example, there's 140px on top for the logo, which could be more like 30px if the words were all on one line, etc.

- There's a ton of data in the reviews section. I hope it's never lost. I think you should import that into your new review system. There probably isn't a "convert posts in this forum into Xenforo review system" script you can run, but you could find someone two write some php/perl/python/etc. to do that.

Finally, Joe, thanks for all you do - running a big site (especially one with contentious content) is not easy and takes a lot of work. It's appreciated by many.

 

[jluck]

I like it on my PC but it still has issues on my mobile (Galaxy note2), So I couldn't vote accurately.