EVE Search - A few reasons these new forums suck (...and here's hoping for some quick fixes)

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

A few reasons these new forums suck (...and here's hoping for some quick fixes)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 19:07:00 - [1] - Quote Personally, I've simply applied the forum-fixing CSS and the link-fixing javascript I got ready for the test forums, and then blocked googleapis (most notably jquery-ui, which is the culprit of all the linking hideousness, and the rest of them are a main cause of the slowdown in loading the forums now suffer). GÇªand now it's actually a somewhat useful place to be. Of course, without being able to rearrange the code, the CSS can only do so much GÇö some stuff is simply beyond fixing from client customization, and other will simply become incurably bugged, but that's still hellalot better than what the forums themselves currently offer.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 19:57:00 - [2] - Quote Ga'len wrote: Possibly....or we can iterate for them. Looky, I has a signature image! Use HTML to link in your signature in your forums properties. The only wrinkle so far, you are limited to a height of 75 pixels. <img src="URL of signature"/> GÇªmore importantly, how did you get a link in yours? I can't get them to work. Oh, and as for suckiness, let's just look at the page header. They say a picture says more than a thousand wordsGÇª unfortunately, a single picture is not enough to show off all the insanely obvious errors in the design of just the head GÇö before we've even gotten to the posts themselves. Duplication Irrelevant elements Waste of space Mixed/wrong contexts
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 20:18:00 - [3] - Quote Oh, and btwGÇª Akita T wrote: Problem 1 : Why are the sides cut off at an arbitrary width for absolutely no good reason ? Because there is a very good reason: it (kind of) adheres to proper typographical rules about the maximum width of a column. If anything, it should actually be narrower than it is right now.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 20:49:00 - [4] - Quote Brennivargur wrote: To those that have a 1024x768 or 800x600 screen, GET A NEW ONE. ITS 2011! The counter-argument to that one is: It's 2011, stop running things in full-screen! The width is one of the few things they actually got right. Granted, it should rather be a variable width between a minimum and a maximum value, but it's about the right size as it is GÇö any wider and readability would plummet even further (and with the font/size/colour/contrast choices they made, it's not off to a good start as it isGÇª)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 20:56:00 - [5] - Quote Whitehound wrote: In short, be cool and wait a few days. The new forum will look just like the old one. The problem is that we've already waited a few ~~days~~monthsGÇª and so far they've ignored pretty much every problem people have brought up. Hell, I managed to fix some issues client-side in less than an hour. So a few days GÇö much less a few months GÇö is already more time than it should take.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 21:16:00 - [6] - Quote Whitehound wrote: This is only your impatience, Tippia. Not really, no, since it literally was a "couple of minutes" fix that was pointed out to them (and a fix given to them) months ago. Their choice not to implement an available copy-paste fix to glaring issues has nothing to do with our impatience, but with their incompetence.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 21:30:00 - [7] - Quote Whitehound wrote: Instead of being thankful do you call CCP incompetent. Yes. Since they gave us something with less functionality, more bugs, poor layout, and since they didn't take any of the comments about these things into account before pushing the forum live, I have nothing to be thankful for. GÇªand the fact that I could fix those issues client-side in one sitting, whereas they couldn't do it server-side over two testing phases and a number of months make them less competent than me. So "incompetent" fits the bill quite nicely.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 21:50:00 - [8] - Quote Selinate wrote: New forums are fine. Quit bitching. Once the forums are fine (as in: I no longer have to apply client-side fixes to make them look and work sensibly), I willGÇª
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 21:57:00 - [9] - Quote Selinate wrote: They work sensibly. Forums are fine. Again, quit bitching. The abundance of pointless and counter-productive JS nonsense that breaks standard UI guidlines and trample over standard browsing behaviour (or, rather, the complete lack of being able to turn all of that crap off) says otherwise.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 22:10:00 - [10] - Quote Selinate wrote: Again, quit bitching about something that's working fine. GÇªand again: as soon as they're working fine, I'll quit bitching. Overriding the browser's behaviour is pretty much the web definition of nor working fine GÇö once that's gone, then maybeGÇª (And they don't look particularly nice either unless you move stuff around a whole lot).
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 22:21:00 - [11] - Quote Selinate wrote: Quit bitching about the forums, they're fine. No and no, in that order. Until they've fixed all the things that are broken GÇö and there are lots of them GÇö they are not fine. Until they've fixed all the crimes against design GÇö and there are lots of those as well GÇö they are not fine. Once they have done that, we can talk again. If you don't see why the above is the case, then ok, you might not suffer from it. That doesn't mean the errors aren't there or that they're not very very bad errors, nor does it mean that you can tell people to stop explaining what needs to be fixed (because there's a lot of that).
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25	Posted - 2011.04.07 22:27:00 - [12] - Quote Selinate wrote: Yes, but bitching about a perfectly functional forum as if it's completely and utterly broken isn't all that intelligent, either. It's a pretty large step from "functional" to "fine"GÇª GÇªespecially since some of the bugs and errors they've made kind of threaten the "functional" claim as well.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.