Stackoverflow

Lanark · 2009-11-17 20:50:44

If you look at http://stackoverflow.com
The key features that make that system so much easier to use than conventional forums are

1) A single listing of all new threads (Twitter style)
2) Tags that let people categorise posts in multiple ways

I would hate fluxbb to start getting feature bloat but I do think that removing Categories and Forums altogether and adding tags instead could be a real step forward. It keeps the system really simple to use but is actually more flexible - the admin no longer has to add/remove/merge the different categories/forums, that all gets done automatically by the users choice of tags for each new thread.

This kind of single list layout has also been copied by Facebook - so it seems to be the way things are moving ('old style' forums are going to start looking a bit dated)

Maybe something to consider for version 2.0?

Franz · 2009-11-17 20:58:05

Why exactly are you double posting?

sirena · 2009-11-18 09:49:04

It's very, very debatable whether 'removing Categories and Forums altogether and adding tags instead could be a real step forward'. Ditto with the single list layout adopted by some forums like Vanilla.

The result is often a big step backwards in terms of navigability, usability and the user experience.

'Classic' forum navigation interfaces work well, in part because users don't have to re-learn how to use a forum on every site they visit, which is what can happen with tag or other alternative metaphor interfaces.

Not all fashions need to be followed. Just because it's old fashioned is no reason to abandon something.

You can also, of course, bolt on tag support to flux if you want tags. I believe there are mods for that.

Franz · 2009-11-18 09:50:33

You're right.

The reason why this works so well on Stack Overflow is that topics usually are done pretty quickly, while on a forum you often want to find an old topic again...

Paul · 2009-11-18 10:26:23

Once a board grows beyond a certain size the only way to find anything is to search regardless of the way the thing is organised. Tagging doesn't get around the problem if pulling up all topics for a particualar tag gives you a large number of results. Isn't it more important to have a good search feature and to make sure everything is indexed nicely by the search engines?

I would have said a bigger weakness in the traditional design is it doesn't work very well for small boards that have say one category and could actually get away with only one forum.

MattF · 2009-11-18 14:16:49

Personally, I hate tags, (with a vengeance), and that type of layout. It looks horrid, in my opinion.

Paul wrote:

I would have said a bigger weakness in the traditional design is it doesn't work very well for small boards that have say one category and could actually get away with only one forum.

It would be easy enough to alter that though and just do a straight forum display instead of categories. Personally, I like hierarchal methods. It keeps everything logical. That link in the first post, on the other hand, resembles some drug induced idea, in my opinion.

Franz · 2009-11-18 14:50:01

MattF wrote:

It would be easy enough to alter that though and just do a straight forum display instead of categories. Personally, I like hierarchal methods. It keeps everything logical. That link in the first post, on the other hand, resembles some drug induced idea, in my opinion.

I'd say, this is going a little too far

As I mentioned above, IMO the flat list works wonderful for the quick help-and-then-forget scenario as is needed in StackOverflow. I find that site quite helpful myself.

Also: success obviously proves their point.

MattF · 2009-11-18 19:22:36

lie2815 wrote:

I'd say, this is going a little too far

You're just as entitled to have your own opinion as I.

Also: success obviously proves their point.

Successful doesn't necessarily mean good. However, as I say, to each their own. Some obviously like it and some don't. That's the normal way of things. I still think it looks like something induced.

twohawks · 2010-03-26 23:03:39

I hate tags (I'm too old school). I think they are a great idea for a freeform organizational tool, though. Freeform organization, who'd a thunk it?

Of course, a tags "only" system would not support those instances that require setting up (sculpting) a rigid mapped environment, i.e., a place like a community with buildings, rooms, subject groups. and so on, that do not change (or need to strictly managed by the host), or if they do change, can be managed as solid collectives (hope that makes sense).

That said, as little as I yet relate to a tag system (I resemble Matt's remarks pretty closely), ...seems it is considered wave of the now and future and rising in popularity for many applications; so I think it would be interesting to see what a fluxbb "on tags" offering might look like (form- and function- wise). I bet some would find it very appealing and useful. Of course, if it looked anything like the albeit wonderful resource of stackoverflow, then I would tend to suspect someone spiked the Flux developer's koolaid... as I am sure that a tags system doesn't have to be ugly and confusing. (Hey, not that I got anything against anyone drinking 'special' koolaid.)

Just passing by... best to you all ;^)

Last edited by twohawks (2010-03-26 23:09:33)

Kirth · 2010-03-31 10:46:31

Perhaps when a board is about one general topic, a tag system rather than the classical approach would be useful. However, most fora have general sections, off-topic sections and so forth. When taking this in to account, the tag system could get véry messy, especially with people who're not too familiar with it using it.

Jérémie · 2010-04-05 13:43:31

No categories is hell. I spent 30 seconds on Stack Overflow, my eyes are bleeding, my brain is drilling through my skull to get out and go hide under the bed.

As for tags, it's an old bad baaaaad idea. I want to tag this thread, I'm going to tag it “Tags”. Paul will of course tag it “tag”. Ringo will himself tag it “NoCategories”. And George will tag it “Taxonomy”, because he's the smart one. So now, we have 4 tags for the same things. Try finding anything in a moderate -to-big sized forums using this kind of tools. And don't get me started on internationalization of tags...

Assisted tags, with human oversight, a *lot* of smart helping tools and automatons (for case, plurals, synonyms, i18n, etc.) might *sometimes* work. Even the biggest sites, with tons of money and man hours do it wrong, so I'm guessing it's way too overreaching for Flux.

MattF · 2010-04-06 22:09:54

Jérémie wrote:

No categories is hell. I spent 30 seconds on Stack Overflow, my eyes are bleeding, my brain is drilling through my skull to get out and go hide under the bed.

artoodetoo · 2010-04-07 14:42:08

It is easy to make something new deriving from forum. For example, to remove visible hierarchy from presentation layer.
It's not necessary to cut something in db scheme.

Just for example: Photojojo looks like blog or whatever. It has 1 forum (and i think 1 category)

kaost · 2010-04-15 00:26:35

I don't like that. I love the simple, traditional forum layout of flux. That's what attracted most of us. A forum is not all about an easy way to find information, it's more about community.

orkneywd · 2010-05-20 17:46:40

I adopted the stackoverflow method of voting posts up/down into a test installation of Flux and thought the end result was pretty cool - I'll package it up for mod release. Essentially it works just like a reputation/karma feature but was done per-topic, aswell as globally per-user.

I set the topics query to "order by post_reputation" instead of last_post, so that posts with the highest rep are shown first. On a support forum where multiple answers might be given by different users it definately has its advantages as the correct answer would be the first one read by the user, instead of having to click through multiple pages

artoodetoo · 2010-05-26 06:37:15

downliner, sounds very interestin!

Forums

#1 2009-11-17 20:50:44

Stackoverflow

#2 2009-11-17 20:58:05

Re: Stackoverflow

#3 2009-11-18 09:49:04

Re: Stackoverflow

#4 2009-11-18 09:50:33

Re: Stackoverflow

#5 2009-11-18 10:26:23

Re: Stackoverflow

#6 2009-11-18 14:16:49

Re: Stackoverflow

#7 2009-11-18 14:50:01

Re: Stackoverflow

#8 2009-11-18 19:22:36

Re: Stackoverflow

#9 2010-03-26 23:03:39

Re: Stackoverflow

#10 2010-03-31 10:46:31

Re: Stackoverflow

#11 2010-04-05 13:43:31

Re: Stackoverflow

#12 2010-04-06 22:09:54

Re: Stackoverflow

#13 2010-04-07 14:42:08

Re: Stackoverflow

#14 2010-04-15 00:26:35

Re: Stackoverflow

#15 2010-05-20 17:46:40

Re: Stackoverflow

#16 2010-05-26 06:37:15

Re: Stackoverflow

Board footer