Quick Reply

Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here.
Forum rules
Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here. Feature requests are closed.
SamG
Registered User
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm

Re: Quick Reply

Post by SamG » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:00 am

Malphas wrote:...good developers will take into consideration the opinions of their software's community.
We have no clear evidence that we don't have good developers simply because at some point in the past the developers made a project goal decision that rejects any value to phpBB core of quick reply. We do have some evidence that the community has been less than willing to let the matter rest outside the suggestion tracker. After years of inane debate, it gets harder than ever to make the discussion interesting, let alone profitable.
Malphas wrote:This is exactly my point about any feature being subject to personal opinion on whether or not it is in line with the project's goals.
The significance to the project's goals of the personal opinion of the developers was my point, not that personal opinion was not at issue. I said as much in my opening comment. Communities are shifting sand, and phpBB's community is made up of everybody from hard core OSS advocates to people who want vB for free, and that's without getting into the subject of people who use multiple BB solutions either simultaneously or over time. The user base isn't nearly monolithic enough, it seems to me, to be the determining factor when compared to the much more stable (though changeable) point of view of the developers.
Malphas wrote:...the argument against including a quick reply seems to basically be "we don't like quick reply, we believe it encourages lesser quality posts, therefore we're not giving it any consideration regardless of community opinion".
I can sympathize with your frustration here. If the community could show some sort of substantive argument, something that didn't run along the lines of "we like quick reply in large numbers, it's trivial to add and toggle, so therefore you're [insert adjective] because you [insert adjective] refuse to add it," I could see a reason for all the fuss. As it is, all I see is a battle of opinions and very little substance. That's not to say that I think quick reply is of no value, nor is it to say that I agree with the con argument you noted. It's more to say that I see very little point in this drawn out discussion at all. The suggestion tracker is the place to make the point, not the forums. Just my opinion, of course.
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood

Malphas
Registered User
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:39 pm

Re: Quick Reply

Post by Malphas » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:18 am

SamG wrote:We have no clear evidence that we don't have good developers
I didn't claim otherwise.
SamG wrote:The significance to the project's goals of the personal opinion of the developers was my point, not that personal opinion was not at issue. I said as much in my opening comment.
Yes, I was agreeing.
SamG wrote:I can sympathize with your frustration here. If the community could show some sort of substantive argument, something that didn't run along the lines of "we like quick reply in large numbers, it's trivial to add and toggle, so therefore you're [insert adjective] because you [insert adjective] refuse to add it," I could see a reason for all the fuss.
Again, you seem to be interpreting comments as being far more belligerent than they actually are. Like I just said the issue is not so much with the developer's not including a quick reply, but the utter refusal to contemplate the idea, and the dismissive, almost disdainful, manner in which the issue is handled whenever the issue crops up.

SamG
Registered User
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm

Re: Quick Reply

Post by SamG » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:37 am

Malphas wrote:I didn't claim otherwise.
That's just how I was reading the "good developers will isten, and these developers aren't listening on this issue" line of discussion.
Malphas wrote:Again, you seem to be interpreting comments as being far more belligerent than they actually are.
That's possible, but unintentional. I'd like you to see it more as a reflection of my point of view on the value of the discussion.
Malphas wrote:Like I just said the issue is not so much with the developer's not including a quick reply, but the utter refusal to contemplate the idea, and the dismissive, almost disdainful, manner in which the issue is handled whenever the issue crops up.
And like I just said, what you're considering is not the developers prerogative to make a final decision but their inability to sustain an argument over their decision. That assumes they are obliged to make a sustainable argument before the community in the first place, and by the very nature of such a discussion over an extended time, they have gotten brief in their replies, when they do reply. I don't have to defend any harshness on their part (nor do I) to consider the general approach taken by the community on this subject equally unhelpful.
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood

User avatar
wingnut144
Registered User
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:46 pm
Location: Idaho

Re: Quick Reply

Post by wingnut144 » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:47 pm

Oh hell, not this again.

I sure hope this NEVER becomes a standard part of phpBB...... :roll:

User avatar
Stallyon
Registered User
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 1:30 pm
Location: BNE
Contact:

Re: Quick Reply

Post by Stallyon » Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:04 pm

Someone close this thread before I burn it?

This is a BULLETIN BOARD, not a freaking CHAT board!

drewtscott
Registered User
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:43 am

Re: Quick Reply

Post by drewtscott » Sun Jan 06, 2008 6:33 am

While I'm not interested in getting overly involved in this debate (especially seeing how childish it has become in other threads ;)) I do want to put in my two cents and say that our forum has quick reply installed and our users are capable of and willing to make intelligent posts even so. When moving from phpBB2 to phpBB3, we didn't have quick reply for a decent amount of time, and the quality of posts reflected no change. I understand the developers' worries about it becoming too 'chat-like,' but the fact of that matter is that the maturity and purpose of each forum are determined by the members and the content - not where the post button is located.

User avatar
Highway of Life
Registered User
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: I'd love to change the World, but they won't give me the Source Code
Contact:

Re: Quick Reply

Post by Highway of Life » Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:06 am

Indeed, I (personally) have experienced very "chat-like" behaviour without a Quick Posting MOD, as for a good gauge to differentiate between quality of posts with or without it, I don’t know. Many times it depends on the demographic of your board.

BTW, please don’t call it a “Thread”.. phpBB has “Topics” (flat view), not “Threads” (threaded view). :P
Image

drewtscott
Registered User
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:43 am

Re: Quick Reply

Post by drewtscott » Sun Jan 06, 2008 6:34 pm

Highway of Life wrote:BTW, please don’t call it a “Thread”.. phpBB has “Topics” (flat view), not “Threads” (threaded view). :P
Err ... okay? That's not the only definition of "thread," and it's a pretty common forum term :P I understand that some sort of common terms have to be established for creating a piece of software and listing its features, but that doesn't mean that all other terms instantly become 'wrong' ;)

User avatar
Highway of Life
Registered User
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: I'd love to change the World, but they won't give me the Source Code
Contact:

Re: Quick Reply

Post by Highway of Life » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 pm

Oh? I encourage you to listen to This podcast ;) & :P
Image

drewtscott
Registered User
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:43 am

Re: Quick Reply

Post by drewtscott » Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:00 am

Highway of Life wrote:Oh? I encourage you to listen to This podcast ;) & :P
Right, I understand what you're saying and as I said before, I understand why a set of terms must be defined independently for each piece of software, (to an extent) but that wasn't really my point. What I'm saying is that even though the official term you're trying to get us to say is 'topics,' that doesn't mean 'thread' is completely incorrect. Thread can also refer to a group of posts relating to one subject/topic (dictionary.com/webster.com) Again, I understand what you're saying, but the word 'thread' has evolved from just the view, which is not what I was referring to. Sorry for the fuss, but I don't think attempting to change the vocabulary of users over such a small matter is necessarily the most important thing in topics such as these.

Post Reply