revert layout

This is a vote for putting the main divisions under Audio Software back into the root directory level, meaning there will be two more entries there (one more than before, with the addition of Audition 3) and NO combined levels. The current arrangement is unpleasant and I can see no advantage at all to it.

This is a vote for putting the main divisions under Audio Software back into the root directory level, meaning there will be two more entries there (one more than before, with the addition of Audition 3) and NO combined levels. The current arrangement is unpleasant and I can see no advantage at all to it.

You can only vote if there is a poll - and there isn't one. We agreed the structure ages ago, and it's logically correct. I find it to be perfectly pleasant, myself - and no, I didn't invent it.

I can certainly vote; I did. If you wish to label it something else, that’s irrelevant; I would have quite the same power, or lack thereof, if there were a poll.

It isn’t so pleasant because now it is necessary to do an additional
open a category,
wait and wait for the screen to refresh,
then open what I actually want,
then wait again,
that serves absolutely no useful purpose.

Sure, this new arrangement seems completely logical, and our admins have done a nice job of having it efficiently and punctually having it set up (thank you!).  

When I visit AM, I typically click the link to see new posts since my last visit, which makes the layout irrelevant.  But it's true: if you want to cut to the chase and see the latest on AA3, you have to click an extra time.  Perhaps some do appreciate not having more than the present 12 board names listed on the main page.  

Do you all agree that the present arrangement is a good compromise between directness of access and efficiency of not overwhelming the main page with too many board name categories?  If not, what would you change?  Make AA3 a 13th board entry?

Maybe starting a poll isn't such a bad idea, if I may presume.  I would think many of us are fine as is, but a few will find this annoying.

It isn’t so pleasant because now it is necessary to do an additional
open a category,
wait and wait for the screen to refresh,
then open what I actually want,
then wait again,
that serves absolutely no useful purpose.

The good part about this forum software is that it places links to the forums contained within a category on the home page (at least it does on the default forum theme).  So you don't actually have to open a category if you don't wish to (unless you are going to a sub-forum within a forum within a category).   

Regardless, it is necessary to do something extra to find out the status of each "sub" forum. What is the downside to having the previous main page, with just one additional line for Audition 3?

Regardless, it is necessary to do something extra to find out the status of each "sub" forum. What is the downside to having the previous main page, with just one additional line for Audition 3?

What's the downside in using the unread posts/unread replies facility? This finds the status of all of the forums for you.

The downside to your arrangement is that it takes up more screen real-estate, and doesn't organise the forums into Audition code-bases, which the present arrangement does. But as I said, this is not a voting issue.

The downside of using that facility is that is is something extra. Extra time and waiting  is necessary to sign on and check it. For a long time now, after all, there has been no reason to sign on most days. No doubt for broadband access users, and for people who want to screw around with cookie managers, or who don’t care about such things and just allow everything to be tracked, it doesn’t seem like a very big thing, but there was no problem at all until visibility was taken away from the main screen.

The Screen real-estate may be an emotional preference for some but it is not a real issue. The screen would not take a significantly longer time to load, it would require four page operations to get to the bottom  instead of three, but no load from the server time for those operations, and everything would be visible.

Grouping into main categories by code base doesn’t improve the functionally or usefulness in any way. So what if they are sub-divided by code base? Simple listing them is order makes as much sense and is easier to use.

The downside of using that facility is that is is something extra. Extra time and waiting  is necessary to sign on and check it. For a long time now, after all, there has been no reason to sign on most days. No doubt for broadband access users, and for people who want to screw around with cookie managers, or who don’t care about such things and just allow everything to be tracked, it doesn’t seem like a very big thing, but there was no problem at all until visibility was taken away from the main screen.

If you don't want to play with the big boys and girls, then that's your problem, not ours.

The downside of using that facility is that is is something extra. Extra time and waiting  is necessary to sign on and check it.

Not if you allow cookies and bookmark the unread posts page.  

Disallowing cookies has no beneficial effect that I have ever detected; but using a browser such as Opera, you could, if you wanted, allow cookies only on a site-by-site basis.  There's probably a Firefox addon or three to do the same; and I think it can even be done, in a far more obtuse manner, in IE by putting sites into zones with different settings.

Paul

I already covered cookies, and the management thereof, in my last post. My reasons for not wanting cookies and browsing history to remain in place are much more compelling than problems with a single forum that has taken an unusual turn on format.

That stuff two posts back skirts awfully close to simple name calling, with no redeeming content. I expected better.

I already covered cookies, and the management thereof, in my last post. My reasons for not wanting cookies and browsing history to remain in place are much more compelling than problems with a single forum that has taken an unusual turn on format.

There's nothing unusual about this forum or its layout.  You are simply avoiding a way of making it easier for yourself, and then complaining about it.  If you feel you have truly compelling reasons not to let cookies do the job they were invented for, that's your business - but don't expect the world to accomodate you on that, especially as the option to accept or deny cookies on a site-by-site basis is open to you.

Paul

That stuff two posts back skirts awfully close to simple name calling, with no redeeming content. I expected better.

Of course there's no redeeming content - there's nothing to redeem. How can there be in a thread based entirely on your demonstrable paranoia?

I expect a better attitude from forum participants, and I am frequently disappointed.

That was a good attempt to turn it around, but of course it is the post itself that needs justifying content, rather in the mode of which court decisions speak about pornography that has, or does not have, “socially redeeming value.”