Suggestion Box for banniNation Improvements

From Voice of the Proletariat

Jump to: navigation, search


Contents

[edit] Quickie Navigation

Suggestion Box for banniNation Improvements

New Items 
* Template to Add a New Suggestion
* Most Active Suggestions (Moved to page because of too many comments)
* New Suggestions
 
Older Open Suggestions (These items are still open for voting!)
* Suggestion Box Queue Items
* Suggestion Box Comments Items (Tagging Items Included)
* Suggestion Box Metrics Items
* Suggestion Box Other Stuff Items

Suggestions Being Implemented or Archived (Closed to voting)
* Under Development
* Quality Assurance
* Implemented Suggestions
* Stalled and Rejected Ideas

Suggestion Box Total Table of Contents (ALL items not on main page indexed here)
* Suggestion Box TOC



[edit] How to Vote

* Log in (same user/pass as Bannination)
* Click "edit" on the section you want to vote on,
* Find the line that corresponds with your vote, Yea/Nay
* Add a comma to the last name in that line,
* Type three ~'s to add your name without a timestamp,
* Click Save.

Please click (edit) next to the subsection you want to vote or comment on, and not the entire page, to avoid accidentally erasing someone else's changes to this page.



[edit] Template to Add a New Suggestion

  • Submitted By: Type ~ three times
  • Submitted On: Type ~ four times.

Description

Put your details here and end it with ~ three times.

Comments

  • No comments from other users yet. (Please sign all your comments with ~ four times!)

Voting

Yea Nay
Hit ~ three times to vote! Hit ~ three times to vote! 


Note: Do NOT edit this template and hit "Save Page" afterwards.
Click edit ONLY to copy the contents and create a new section on the
page you need this template for. Templates do not have a history that
can be easily reversed.



[edit] Open Suggestions Under Consideration



[edit] New Suggestions

[edit] Create a separate NSFW RSS feed and/or a complete RSS feed that includes ALL of the front page articles

  • Submitted By: Allrod
  • Submitted On: Allrod 05:14, 6 April 2008 (PDT)

RSS feeds are a great resource for browsing the site, but you don't get the NSFW topics.

I have been using a RSS reader to follow Bannination, but there is not currently a NSFW feed. I realize this was done to keep people out of trouble at work. However, that also keeps people who don't have a NSFW "issue" from getting the full experience.

I propose that a separate NSFW RSS feed be created and/or a RSS feed that includes ALL of the front page articles. That way people can subscribe to the feeds that are best for them.

Additionally, it would be nice if the RSS feed allowed you to go directly to the webpage that spawned the discussion (if applicable) as well as the discussion page itself.Allrod

Comments

This has come up before, and it is somehow tangled up in the legalese - something about not being able to verify the age of the RSS subscriber in order to provide NSFW content, or something. Cranky bastard 23:19, 22 April 2008 (PDT)

Voting

Yea Nay
Hit ~ three times to vote! Hit ~ three times to vote!


[edit] New Queue Rules

I propose a change to how things get front paged.


I make this suggestion after hearing quite a few people complain about the current system in various threads. There is a problem with the number of people who actually vote on stories in the queue. There are really only about 10 or so people voting at any given time, so it seems fair that any story getting over 5 or 6 votes should be front paged when the 2 hour time limit expires. If a story is the top story before then, then it merely gets front paged earlier. A lot of stories with a significant number of votes (sometimes over 10 votes) are getting tossed and it doesn't make sense. If the majority of voters want the story front-paged then it should be front-paged!

I think this would also help with variety on the front-page. I also hear people complaining about there being too many political stories, etc. So what do you all think? SelectiveDisclosure


Comments

  • grahams has voiced legitimate concerns about too many stories being frontpaged which dilutes the discussion. Maybe a test drive would be useful, or turn this on during peak periods (I believe there is something similar already, and high scoring entries that don't frontpage get saved for later, too). So right now I'm abstaining from voting. 0verlord
  • I don't believe the "high scoring entries get saved for later" thing really exists, so I'm voting for this. -- Meta 09:58, 5 March 2008 (PST)
  • High scoring entries certainly should be getting recycled. I've seen it happen! This is actually pretty much how the queue used to work and it essentially means that any 5 well motivated individuals can push through anything and as much as they'd like. I do have some q changes planned for 2.0 or 2.1, whenever we get there. Grahams 16:40, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Voting

Yea Nay
Meta,SelectiveDisclosure,Eddyatwork,Klumthefark Kesshi



[edit] Moar NSFW threads

  • Submitted By: Quick1
  • Submitted On: Quick1 10:59, 31 March 2008 (PDT)

I'd like to propose some kind of new queue schedule to allow more NSFW threads to be submitted.

Currently, a NSFW discussion only has the chance to be frontpaged if it is the top of all articles when the queue comes around to the "top rated of any type" part of it's schedule, which means it has to get a ton of votes. My change would be to allow those NSFW discussion threads to be also counted when the queue gets to "top rated discussion", so that the top rated SFW or NSFW discussion will be frontpaged, instead of just the top rated SFW discussion. Quick1

Comments

  • No comments from other users yet. (Please sign all your comments with ~ four times!)

Voting

Yea Nay
Quick1 Hit ~ three times to vote!


[edit] Beginning the Redesign Submission Process

Description

ban_thumb.jpg
Link to Full size image

This is a pleas to start a default redesign process. This site is very much a second-generation website and there are design solutions that could help it function even better. This is a suggestion and certainly not a criticism. Some things that we can take from this design:

  • Use of color to draw attention to the thread area could aid in general legibility
  • Collecting top level locations in standard top nav could aid in usability
  • Instituting a "lab" (much like google labs) for test programs and pages may encourage more third party involvement and allocate interest in a more focused way
  • Aggregating persistent threads into the same location may spotlight them more. Adding a "New Member Thread" may encourage new member interaction immediately.
  • Reorganization of Mode links along with color "key" may make instant viewing of prefs easier for user
  • Reorganization of footer may make meta discussion link and donate feel more integrated
  • Shifting low priority syndication tools to bottom may keep presentation cleaner

I understand that most redesigns here are done via css scripts and user tools. I am suggesting we give a new html organization of content a shot as a baseline. Mutilato

Update: grahams said he would like to see a more compressed header.
More compressed header
Seasonal header. How this might look with upper header changed
Accompanying wiki implementation Mutilato 10:26, 29 January 2008 (PST)


Comments

  • I like it, keeps with the current 'clean' theme but delineates things a bit better. I like the icons too. 0verlord
  • I like it, except I hate gray text on gray. Stabilize the HTML, remove the last few legacy tables and add CSS support to bN as a user option and you'll see a ton of themes built. Well, at least 1, from me, anyway. - Meta 10:00, 5 March 2008 (PST)
    • Agreed. A new default theme would be great, but I'd like to be able to use my own CSS without an extension. User theme could be a public field in profiles to encourage sharing. Ludditemike 10:31, 5 March 2008 (PST)

Voting

Yea Nay
Mutilato, Klumthefark, 0verlord, Fuckyou Hit ~ three times to vote!


[edit] Earn additional anon posts with cool votes

  • Submitted By: 0verlord
  • Submitted On: 11:37, 15 January 2008 (PST)

I propose that if an anon post gets a certain number of cool votes, an additional anon post should be awarded to the poster

This would allow threads to continue even though the anon poster would have originally run out of posts. 0verlord

Comments

  • Very good idea. Andbruno 11:50, 15 January 2008 (PST)
    • Of course it's a good idea, I came up with it. 0verlord
  • I think the original submitter should have unlimited posts, but i don't think this is a good idea. You'll end up seeing trolls creating an account which posts lots of funny stuff so they can amass a bunch of anon posts to screw with us Grahams
    • I agree with this for discussions. News articles don't need it, since you'd find the political junkies posting articles and anonymously posting throughout the thread. fuckyou
  • Initially seems like a great idea, in keeping with the community moderation philosophy. To add Grahams' thoughts to this, why not make downvotes to an anonymous post likewise reduce the total number of posts available. Additionally, I see a general need to account for cases where the number of up and down votes may be nearly equal, but the aggregate total of votes are very high. In this case, a post could be 'hidden' with text that says "This post is highly contested by many readers, and has received a very large number of both up and down votes." Click here to see this post." In cases where many of a user's posts acquire large numbers of both cool and lame votes, all of the users posts might be dealt with this way: "This user's comments are often highly contested and.... " etc. Huh? Whadda ya think??? Kurst putz

Voting

Yea Nay
0verlord, Andbruno, Wushupork, Eddyatwork, Ludditemike Hit ~ three times to vote!


[edit] Link to mark replies read in "MasterbN"

  • Submitted By: Andbruno
  • Submitted On: 11:31, 15 January 2008 (PST)

I propose a link next to each "USER replied to you in THREAD" (that people who donate to bN get) that essentially marks reply as read.

This would allow you to mark replies you've already scrolled by without having to click on the reply and reload the thread multiple times. It would also allow you to fully ignore troublesome individuals Andbruno

Comments

  • WANT. This will also reduce pageviews from users clearing out replies. 0verlord
  • I Want this too, someone should make it :) Grahams 16:40, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Voting

Yea Nay
Andbruno, 0verlord, Ludditemike, Wushupork, Eddyatwork Hit ~ three times to vote!



[edit] "See Votes" Link In Thread

  • Submitted By: Atario
  • Submitted On: Atario 02:10, 4 December 2007 (PST)

Description

I'd like to be able to see the corresponding "See Votes" link (as shown in the Queue — the one that goes to http://www.bannination.com/cgi-bin/sunlight.pl?queue_id=somenumber) inside the thread. Possibly in the tiny links at the bottom?

Often, I don't check the queue and only see the story once it's frontpaged. And then, sometimes, I get awfully curious about the queue votes/queue fight/tag fight that preceded what I'm looking at.

Atario

Comments

  • I would personally like to see this as I am a curious person, but grahams has said he has a few privacy concerns regarding frontpaged items. I think it's something we should look at. 0verlord
  • The information's available already, not providing the link is just security by obscurity. -- Meta 10:02, 5 March 2008 (PST)
  • Yeah this isn't really too hard, but right now i don't have a solid link back to the queue entry that created a front page story so it'll need a few db changes Grahams 16:40, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Voting

Yea Nay
Meta,Atario, Eddyatwork, 0verlord, Fuckyou,shadow blasko Hit ~ three times to vote!


[edit] Queue Submission Limit

Description

Limit submissions to the queue to one active submission in queue per IP address/all linked accounts. As soon as submission expires and/or gets mainpaged, that restriction on submitting further items becomes lifted.

Provide suggestions for other ways to implement a queue slowdown tactic to prevent flooding/shitting.

Comments

  • I'm against this. It would make the queue even slower than it is and discourage people with real content to add from submitting. Eddyatwork 18:42, 6 November 2007 (PST)
    • Big nay from me too. Very bad idea. Andbruno 11:33, 15 January 2008 (PST)
  • Nay - when I submit, it's usually a dump of 2-3 stories since I'm not a frequent contributor. 0verlord
  • Definitely not, I typically dump 3-5 stories once per day. And has queueshitting really been a problem recently? - Meta 10:03, 5 March 2008 (PST)
  • No from me. Q-shitters get stfu'd anyway, that's why there's not so much Grahams 16:40, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Voting

Yea Nay
Ratfucker Eddyatwork, Andbruno, Ludditemike, Wushupork, 0verlord, Meta, Kesshi, Fuckyou


[edit] Autotag Threads with Anonymous Status

  • Submitted by: Ratfucker
  • Submitted on: 08:01, 26 September 2007 (PDT)


Description

Now that a form of the "anon post disable" feature has been implemented, something that would be useful for some, depending on their preferences, would be to auto-tag Anonymous Enabled or Disabled threads (except for NSFW since all NSFW threads are anon enabled) with a short tag (something like "anon" and/or "noanon") that indicates the thread's anonymous status. This would allow folks to prioritize those threads within their profile tag likes/dislikes settings. People could keep anonymous disabled threads at the top and make anonymous enabled one drop lower, or vise versa, depending on what they want... This would also serve as a method to be able to track how many threads actually do get submitted as anonymous disabled to see if the feature is being (ab)used as much as some people said it might be. It would also allow other folks to determine, by the number of each types of threads, if one or the other should be submitted to balance the existing number of anon versus noanon threads.


Comments

  • This would be fairly easy to code, I think. Cranky bastard 23:43, 22 April 2008 (PDT)


Voting

Yea Nay
Ratfucker, Eddyatwork, Andbruno Kesshi


[edit] Who is this person?

  • Submitted By: Meta
  • Submitted On: Meta 09:15, 14 September 2007 (PDT)


Description

Allow users to store 1-line descriptions to associate with particular user IDs. When the page is rendered, the descriptions are placed on the IDs via HTML ABBR elements. You can then hover over an ID to read your 1-line reminder of who the person is.

e.g. "Thi5 i5 5omeone'5 alt", "Crackpot who thinks the earth is flat". Meta


Comments

  • IMHO, this is something that can be better done through an extension rather than spending additional hosting resources for. Would be a "Yea" because I like the feature idea a lot, but "Nay" because it could end up putting too much load onto the site's DB. Ratfucker 13:25, 26 September 2007 (PDT)
  • Should be implemented in an extension, too much server load for too small of a benefit. 0verlord
  • The combinatorics of a server-side solution would get ugly in a hurry - each person could have a one-liner stored for every other ID on the site, and that just doesn't scale well. If there's any way to do this with an extension, that would be ideal - those who wanted to spend CPU on this would be able to do so, and those who did not wouldn't be slowed down. Cranky bastard 23:41, 22 April 2008 (PDT)
  • This feature is provided by "baNdit: I'm late for a Rush concert, so no fancy name edition released (version 0.5)", released on April 23, 2008 by bonus eruptus at his http://banditaddon.wordpress.com/ site. Quoting from the release description: "I'll write more later, because I'm late getting ready for a Rush concert tonight. The basics: Right-click a user or their comment, go to baNdit->Users->Add/Edit a note for user. Type in something to remind you of who they are, hit OK. Hover over their name in any thread after that, and you'll see your reminder. Someone's being a dick, but you can't remember who you hate and why? Now you can. Check back later for a better explanation." So, three cheers for bonus eruptus and baNdit 0.5 - and somebody can move this suggestion to wherever it's supposed to go. Cranky bastard 13:33, 23 April 2008 (PDT)

Voting

Yea Nay
Eddyatwork Ratfucker, 0verlord,Kesshi,Fuckyou


[edit] Clarify the acceptable content guidelines

  • Submitted By: Meta
  • Submitted On: Meta 08:27, 11 September 2007 (PDT)


Description

The current acceptable content guidelines simply say: 

"...we'd like to ask for your cooperation and stop short of hard-core pornography."

This simple phrase has led to much debate and whining. More detailed guidelines should be provided, to reduce the whining and flamewars and accusations of nancydom.

Specifically, the guidelines should give more explanation of what does and doesn't constitute "hard-core pornography", and define a few other types of image that will cause the site hosting trouble.

Actual interpretation and enforcement of rules will continue to be by community moderation. The guidelines will never catch every single possibility. The proposed draft also does not attempt to define all exceptions that are allowed. Those things are up to the community to make rulings on, using human judgement on a case-by-case basis.

That said, I propose this new draft for the guidelines, based on extensive community discussion.


Comments

  • I agree. The current suggestion/guideline is open to interpretation and people have different opinions for what crosses the line. Ratfucker 07:13, 26 September 2007 (PDT)


Voting

Yea Nay
Space, Meta, Eddyatwork, Ratfucker,Fuckyou WSUCanuck


[edit] Disable use of HTML in anonymous posts


Description

  • In response to the NSFW discussions going on about posting images that some may find inappropriate, I believe that not allowing HTML to be used by anonymous posters would help to stop some of the hit and run postings that seem to disrupt the threads. This way, anyone posting things like Goatse, Tubgirl, etc would have to use their own nick and could be held accountable for their actions. Also, if a user has 2 image posts zapped within 2 hours, that user would lose HTML posting privileges for 3 hours. They could still post normally, but it would help to stop whatever inappropriate picture floods they may be doing. Metalneck


Comments

  • I suggested in Community Moderation in NSFW Threads a function that would require one to mouse-over a picture to view it. Either that or just turn all pictures into links instead. I do agree with limiting Anon html usage but I don't think it should be completely removed.
  • We already have the option of not entering NSFW threads. We already have the option of not viewing pictures. And with that handy FireFox add-on, we already have the option of not viewing anon posts. You have three ways of avoiding this already, do you need a 4th? Kesshi 12:34, 10 September 2007 (PDT)
    • Get the Cooliris extension for Firefox. It will allow you to view things (images, urls, etc) when moused over.
    • What's to stop an anonymous poster from posting NSFW inages in any thread, not just NSFW ones? This would alleviate that possibility. If they want to post an image, then you could copy/paste a non-html link into a new browser tab. I think the problem is people think that everyone will mind their P's & Q's and will only post things in the threads designated for such things. Sadly, this is not the case. I could just as easily post the goatse.cx image in a caturday thread as I could in a NSFW one. Stripping anons of HTML would make it so if I was to do that, my nick would be showing and then I would be held accountable by the community. Metalneck


Voting

Yea Nay
Metalneck, Space, Eddyatwork Kesshi, Howie_Feltersnatch, 0verlord, Wushupork, Ludditemike,Fuckyou


[edit] Tie Downvoting Ability to Recent, Non-Anonymous Post Count


Description

To mitigate the damage of the alt armies and the fine citizens who use them, I suggest that there be a threshold a user must pass in terms of number of recent comments to be able to vote a post down. To prevent someone from going back to yesterday's threads, posting a few inane comments, and voting everything down, there could be a delay of several hours before comments figure into the calculations.


Comments

  • No comments yet.
  • I think we do something like this already. We restrict voting to people that have posted in maybe the last 2 weeks iirc.


Voting

Yea Nay
Worldbeater, Space, Ratfucker, Eddyatwork Kesshi


[edit] Banning Users

  • Submitted By: Faethe
  • Submitted On: Faethe 07:45, 4 September 2007 (PDT)


Description

  • The only way a user can be banned is because Grahams bans them, or they do something illegal. Illegal being defined as a grievous act that endangers the entire community, such as posting illegal pornography, attacking the servers, or any other act that results in intervention by law enforcement.


Comments

  • Something needs be addressed I think. We don't have this outlined anywhere I am familiar with. If everyone would rather this just remained a 'no-brainer' (which I think it is tbh) we don't have to have a written rule. I don't want to complicate things. I just think a line should be drawn at some point. You can switch this around anyway you like. Faethe 07:45, 4 September 2007 (PDT)
  • Not sure where there is a suggestion in here. --Surfnazi 09:56, 10 September 2007 (PDT)
  • Not sure, either. Why do we need this here? Grahams and company decides who is to be banned and that's about it... We already ban people, why do we need to vote about it? Kesshi 12:32, 10 September 2007 (PDT)


Voting

Yea Nay
Faethe Surfnazi, Eddyatwork,Fuckyou



[edit] Check URL Field in Thread Submission

  • Submitted By: Bboy
  • Submitted On: Bboy 07:25, 31 August 2007 (PDT)


Description

Search for the string "http" in the URL field in the queue "Submit News" form. This way submitters don't switch the two fields, which seems to happen about once per day.


Comments

  • Can't be that hard Bboy 07:25, 31 August 2007 (PDT)
  • Agreed. Some validation (could be client-side to minimize processor time on the server) is a good idea. Wushupork 07:56, 31 August 2007 (PDT)
  • Would be great, has bit me in the ass a couple times. 0verlord
  • There is code in place now (been there for a while, actually) that barks if the URL does not begin with 'http'. Mark this suggestion as 'completed.' Cranky bastard 13:45, 23 April 2008 (PDT)
  • test edit with wiki on new server - ignore Cranky bastard 21:00, 16 May 2008 (PDT)

Voting

Yea Nay
Meta,Bboy, Wushupork, Faethe, Eddyatwork, Mutilato, 0verlord,Fuckyou None


[edit] Extended life for starred-at-any-point queue items

  • Submitted By: Swami-on-Rye
  • Submitted On: 21:01, 29 August 2007 (EST)


Description

In order to prevent queue voting wars where people jockey their submissions by downvoting starred items to boost their own submissions, extend the time-to-live for any submission that got a star at any point in time by 30 or 60 minutes.


Comments

  • Sounds like a good idea in principle. The bad news is that there's no distinct state that a starred item passes through where we could easily record "this has been starred", the star is merely a cosmetic thing we add when we draw the page. I'll give it some thought and see if there's a good way to make this work. Is a story ever starred if no-one looks at it? Grahams 22:00, 29 August 2007 (PDT)
    • I guess you could track the last time an entry had a time boost and every pageload (assuming that's the only time star status is calculated) check to see if it's eligible for another boost. *shrug* No idea, but I _would_ like to see good entries make it through the queue instead of losing out to slightly better ones and then dropping off. Food for thought. 0verlord


Voting

Yea Nay
swami-on-rye, Lincoln, Eddyatwork, 0verlord Kesshi


[edit] Scheduled topic participants

  • Submitted By: Vin diesel
  • Submitted On: 1 August 2007


Description

Could there be a way to sign your name as a participant (not just a voter) for a scheduled topic, both during voting and afterward? Some people vote a topic up just because they'd like to see a thread about it--which is a perfectly valid reason to vote--but other people could indicate a deeper interest/commitment by signing their intention to actively participate in the thread (especially for things like debate threads).

Allowing people to sign on while a schedule is still in voting, would help gauge interest in the topic, by showing the number (and/or names) of people actually committed to participation. Other people could still vote it up, if they were just interested in watching whatever happens, but not necessarily contributing to it. An example of how this matters is the "bnette getting naked" threads, where everyone votes it up because they want to see it, but there's nobody who's actually going to do it.

As a general site issue, it might be useful to see how many people actually expect to be posting in a proposed thread.. but this is one area where it could actually be measured in advance, in a practical way.

Plus the site could optionally send out warning emails, a short time in advance, to people who signed on to participate in an upcoming scheduled thread.


Comments

  • No comments yet.


Voting

Yea Nay
Vin diesel, Eddyatwork, Sarmydoc


[edit] Adjustments to Half-Assed Pagination Page Size

Page size of 100 comments may not be optimal.

The Half-Assed Pagination code currently sets the size of a 'page' at 100 comments and will only allow 'Show All' on threads containing up to 1000 comments. While I think the 1000-comment 'Show All' limit is probably reasonable, I'm wondering about whether to increase the 'page size' from 100 to 200 or possibly higher.

The tradeoff is that with larger page sizes (especially on threads with a lot of linked images), some citizens may melt their browsers - but others would appreciate more context in threads and faster navigation up and down really large threads (paging 200 comments up or down as opposed to 100). I guess what I'd like to know is if there is an optimal page size that works the best for the largest number of people. Cranky bastard 23:17, 22 April 2008 (PDT)


Comments I think the best way to solve the problem from a user POV would be to have options for page sizes. Either pick a few increments (50/100/200/400/all) or just let people punch in any integer value they want. That way if you're tired of your browser melting from the millions of images in the strip club, you can set to 50, but if you like abusing your system you can set to 400 and read everything at your leisure. Sarmydoc 23:38, 22 April 2008 (PDT)

  • Variable pagination feature implemented 5/5/2008 - change the size on your profile page. Cranky bastard 14:41, 5 May 2008 (PDT)


[edit] Proposal to make the SFW word filter case-insensitive

Description

I propose that the filter that converts NSFW words to SFW (with asterisks) be made so that it is insensitive to case. As it is, the word 'fuck' gets filtered to f**k, but Fuck or FUCK do not get filtered.

Comments

  • No comments from other users yet. (Please sign all your comments with ~ four times!)

Voting

Yea Nay
Hit ~ three times to vote! Hit ~ three times to vote!



[edit] Navigation Box

Suggestion Box for banniNation Improvements

New Items 
* Template to Add a New Suggestion
* Most Active Suggestions (Moved to page because of too many comments)
* New Suggestions
 
Older Open Suggestions (These items are still open for voting!)
* Suggestion Box Queue Items
* Suggestion Box Comments Items (Tagging Items Included)
* Suggestion Box Metrics Items
* Suggestion Box Other Stuff Items

Suggestions Being Implemented or Archived (Closed to voting)
* Under Development
* Quality Assurance
* Implemented Suggestions
* Stalled and Rejected Ideas

Suggestion Box Total Table of Contents (ALL items not on main page indexed here)
* Suggestion Box TOC
Retrieved from "http://wiki.bannination.com/wiki/Suggestion_Box_for_banniNation_Improvements"
Personal tools