Log inRegister an accountBrowse CSDbHelp & documentationFacts & StatisticsThe forumsAvailable RSS-feeds on CSDbSupport CSDb Commodore 64 Scene Database
 Welcome to our latest new user Rodrigo Yeowtch ! (Registered 2024-11-24) You are not logged in - nap
CSDb User Forums


Forums > CSDb Feedback > tree style discussion / tree structure forum
2008-01-11 15:43
wreg
Account closed

Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 679
tree style discussion / tree structure forum

[spinning off this idea from Why is editing/deleting old comments enabled?]

do we want a tree-styled forum

Quoting mace
(For people who can read Dutch (or like to see what I mean without understanding what is said on the page): something like the frontpage of http://www.tweakers.net (click a news item to see what I mean))


see http://www.heise.de ( any older news entry, then 'Kommentare lesen') for another kind of tree-style discussion.

or do we want to continue it as flat like it is at the moment?

what's your opinion about it?
2008-01-11 15:46
Shadow
Account closed

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 355
I prefer the linear style we have now. I think it gets really cluttered and hard to navigate with the tree style, where you have to go around expanding and clicking to read all comments.
2008-01-11 15:47
wreg
Account closed

Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 679
we could have/keep the flat-view-mode as well

at the moment it's even more cluttered when someone replies to a post added a few posts earlier and such

with an additional tree-view-mode you can achive a little bit of order...
2008-01-11 18:22
TDJ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879
IMDB gives you plenty of options.

"Everybody his (or hers) own csdb!"
2008-01-11 19:47
Devia

Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 401
problem with trees are people tend to answer the wrong branch, which just makes the whole tree idea useless.

but feel free to go hug a tree if you like ;-)
2008-01-11 20:42
Danzig

Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 440
Tree styled forums are gay...
2008-01-12 08:34
Oswald

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086
I never understood tree style threads. especially those where you have to open the branches yourselves. its horrible. worse than adobe acrobat reader. and I hate that a lot. (its latest stunt is to remap .d64s to itself, and then complain that it cannot open them, rerouting to vice is impossible, just lovely)
2008-01-13 00:32
TDJ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879
Quote: I never understood tree style threads. especially those where you have to open the branches yourselves. its horrible. worse than adobe acrobat reader. and I hate that a lot. (its latest stunt is to remap .d64s to itself, and then complain that it cannot open them, rerouting to vice is impossible, just lovely)

Offtopic: if you really hate acrobat reader, why not try foxit reader? It's free, it's small, it's fast, it's foxit reader!

http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php
2008-01-13 01:18
Oswald

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086
thanks for the tip.
2008-01-13 15:20
Tim
Account closed

Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 467
tree style sucks in my opinion
RefreshSubscribe to this thread:

You need to be logged in to post in the forum.

Search the forum:
Search   for   in  
All times are CET.
Search CSDb
Advanced
Users Online
bodo^rab
Low Spirit
Andy/AEG
Kris/Rebels^Clique
Didi/Laxity
Tom/TRS
theK/ATL
katon/Lepsi De
Brush/Elysium
Britelite/Dekadence
Dave/SIDNIFY
Mibri/ATL^MSL^PRX
Icon/TRIAD
Guests online: 113
Top Demos
1 Next Level  (9.7)
2 13:37  (9.7)
3 Coma Light 13  (9.7)
4 Edge of Disgrace  (9.6)
5 Mojo  (9.6)
6 Uncensored  (9.6)
7 Wonderland XIV  (9.6)
8 Comaland 100%  (9.6)
9 What Is The Matrix 2  (9.6)
10 No Bounds  (9.6)
Top onefile Demos
1 Layers  (9.6)
2 Party Elk 2  (9.6)
3 Cubic Dream  (9.6)
4 Copper Booze  (9.6)
5 Libertongo  (9.5)
6 Rainbow Connection  (9.5)
7 Onscreen 5k  (9.5)
8 Morph  (9.5)
9 Dawnfall V1.1  (9.5)
10 It's More Fun to Com..  (9.5)
Top Groups
1 Performers  (9.3)
2 Booze Design  (9.3)
3 Oxyron  (9.3)
4 Nostalgia  (9.3)
5 Censor Design  (9.3)
Top Coders
1 Axis  (9.8)
2 Graham  (9.8)
3 Crossbow  (9.8)
4 Lft  (9.8)
5 HCL  (9.8)

Home - Disclaimer
Copyright © No Name 2001-2024
Page generated in: 0.049 sec.