• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Reorganization of 'Genres' Category

3lectr1c said:
View attachment 1278222
I'm not sure exactly how this re-organization makes the "companies" subforums harder to access? ...
Click to expand...

I use the forum mostly from mobile; when I'm on my laptop I'm typically working on something else. But on Android I can be on my couch and take the time to read a bit.... here's what it looks like on Android:

Screenshot_20240419-110501.png

3lectr1c said:
I feel like at most a complaint should be about this would be that you preferred it in a list rather than as sub-categories for purely visual/organizational means - I don't quite understand thinking this will cause activity in those categories to drop?
Click to expand...
I honestly hadn't paid much attention to the changes (I tend to use this forum from the 'New Posts' interface, and on mobile the list that shows on the screen already has to be scrolled a ways to get to my interests). But then I started seeing negative posts about it in another venue, with people posting that they were going to involve themselves in VCF forums less or even none.

Now that I've noticed, I do find it a bit annoying.
 
ajacocks said:
We organize based on how much the forums are used, here, not based on sales numbers
Click to expand...

Then why is Apple not lumped under Companies? I mean, I’m sure popularity ebbs and flows, but just eyeballing the first pages there are more threads started this month in “TRS-80” than there are under the Apple, and the total number of threads *and* messages are higher than all the Apple subcategories put together. Did you actually check?
 
… Commodore also vastly outweighs the Apple collection in total messages and nearly ties it in thread count. So pardon me for being a little skeptical that there was a formal weight analysis here before deciding to throw something off the front page. Commodore and TRS-80 also *each* individually outweigh *all the other top level categories put together* minus PC, Apple, and Other. In other words, if popularity was the criteria for being front page they deserve it more than S-100 and CP/M put together.

So what is the threshold for promotion to top index?
 
… sorry, I should have consolidated this into one post I suppose, but: by picking out the Tandy and Commodore forums explicitly I am belaboring towards a point or two, and it is *not* about being butthurt that my “favorite thing” got demoted.

The first is obvious: if post volume was supposed to be the criteria it clearly wasn’t actually followed. Reads like a post facto justification for ad-hoc decisions and it doesn’t hold up.

Secondly, I think this does actually have some potential to damage the forum. It’s reasonable to assume that the high post counts in those two genres means they’d found an audience that decided they were the best place on the Internet to grind their particular axe. Some genres of vintage computer have tons of large active dedicated forums, and some don’t. If you asked me what the deal with these two is I would venture the following guesses:

Tandy: from what I can tell there really isn’t much competition here, at least for the Z80 lines. This forum has been winning by default.

Commodore: you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a C64 or Amiga-centric fan site, but this forum’s PET coverage fills a *very significant* gap.

so… yeah, these niches found a home here and the stats look to me like they were doing “front page” numbers by this forum’s standards. So, sure, I can totally see how it would be off-putting and prejudicial to get pitched off the front page into an “other” category while less busy (but apparently the mod’s favorites) stay on top.
 
FWIW, I've been looking any the new lineup since the beginning, and I like it.

Will the Mods be moving IBM (Non-PC) topics into the new forum from wherever they are scattered?

Thanks to the Admins and the Mods for all the good work they do here!

smp
 
lowen said:
But on Android I can be on my couch and take the time to read a bit.... here's what it looks like on Android:
Click to expand...

Yeah I definitely agree - sub-forums should be visible on mobile (from the main forum list).

I did a bit of experimenting, and fortunately this can be done with a few changes in the CSS.

The key seems to be modifying the existing rule for screen widths less than 650 pixels (logical, not physical).

CSS: 
/* Changes should apply only to the "=< 650px" media-query rule: */

@media (max-width: 650px) {
  /* REMOVE this rule: */
  .node-subNodesFlat { display: none; }

  /* Add the following rules: */
  .node-subNodeFlatList > li {
      display: block;
      margin-right: 0;
      text-indent: -1.5em;
  }
  .node-subNodeFlatList {margin-left: 1.5em;}
  .subNodeLink .subNodeLink-icon {text-align: right;}
}

A preview of the results, before vs. after:

vcf-mobile-before.png vcf-mobile-after.png

Disclaimer: should actually be tested on mobile browsers...
 
smp said:
Thanks to the Admins and the Mods for all the good work they do here!
Click to expand...

Unless all the remaining forums other than the IBM category get moved into “companies” or otherwise kicked down into a sub index this isn’t “good work”, or at least it’s not completely equitable and non-biased. The post numbers are clear.

Edit: add DEC to the list of “companies” demotions that’s roughly equal or better than Apple in post count and higher than S-100 or CP/M.
 
Last edited:
VileR said:
Yeah I definitely agree - sub-forums should be visible on mobile (from the main forum list).

I did a bit of experimenting, and fortunately this can be done with a few changes in the CSS.

The key seems to be modifying the existing rule for screen widths less than 650 pixels (logical, not physical).

CSS: 
/* Changes should apply only to the "=< 650px" media-query rule: */

@media (max-width: 650px) {
  /* REMOVE this rule: */
  .node-subNodesFlat { display: none; }

  /* Add the following rules: */
  .node-subNodeFlatList > li {
      display: block;
      margin-right: 0;
      text-indent: -1.5em;
  }
  .node-subNodeFlatList {margin-left: 1.5em;}
  .subNodeLink .subNodeLink-icon {text-align: right;}
}

A preview of the results, before vs. after:

View attachment 1278237 View attachment 1278238

Disclaimer: should actually be tested on mobile browsers...
Click to expand...
That certainly makes it less annoying to me.
 
I think the company list would be for companies that largely didn't share technology with competitors or clones while the technology groupings would include many tiny companies that all built off a relatively similar set of reference designs. No forum design will make everyone happy but this seems good enough that most can find the relevant posting area easily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjs
Sorry, I can't do anything about the CSS. @VeryVon , any thoughts?

I did another re-org, which separates 'Genres' and 'Companies'. I also created some subforums. Please let me know if others would be useful.

FYI, organization, or the lack thereof, is not an indication of preference, as anyone here should already know. :)
We tend to respond to requests, and not take unilateral action unless there is very obvious need.

My area of greatest experience has almost no discussion here, so take that for what you will.

Also, for some reason, iOS Safari renders the sections like this:

IMG_1863.pngIMG_1864.png

- Alex
 
Last edited:
ajacocks said:
I did another re-org, which separates 'Genres' and 'Companies'. I also created some subforums. Please let me know if others would be useful.
Click to expand...
I am not particularly fussed about this, but I do have some suggestions you might want to consider.

1. I think that posts related to companies not listed in the "Companies" section are supposed to go in "Genres" section, right? You could make that more clear by changing the small description under "Companies" from "This category contains Company-specific forums" (which just repeats the information we already have from the forum title) to something like "Use Genres for companies not listed here."

2. Putting each company at the top level takes a lot of room, enough that I don't even see the "Genres" section on the first page on my 1440p monitor. I'd prefer to go back to having a top-level link only for those companies that have several sub-categories, and putting all the rest back under "Other," in order to save space on the top page and slightly improve users' view of the overall forum organisation at first glance.

3. Tandy/Radio Shack and DEC both have about ten times as many posts as the other non-subforum companies, both more than Apple in fact. So it looks to me as if these want to have subforums added. Obviously one doesn't want to go and sort more than 40k threads when the sub-forums are created; perhaps one can work around that by creating a "Not Categorized" sub-forum in each as well, and move all the old messages there. (And maybe sort a few of the more recent threads into the proper categories if one's feeling energetic.)

I can't speak for the DEC stuff, but obvious sub-categories for the TRS-80 forum would be, "Model I/III/IV," "Model 2/16/6000," "Color Computer (6809)," and "Other," the last being for the MC-10, the handhelds (unless they go under Genres), and I don't know what else. I expect that posts Tandy's PC compatibles should go in the IBM PCs/Clones/descendants category; again, a note like I suggested in point 1 could help with that.

I also feel as if it would be good to have a "Japanese microcomputers" genre for MSX, NEC, Fujitsu, Sharp, etc., but I don't know if that's actually justified or it's because I tend to think about those a lot more than other folks around here do.
 
My only thought would be to separate/add a section under "IBM Computers, PCs, Clones and Descendants" for just MCA stuff. MCA seems to be a beast unto itself. Just a thought.

​

 
ajacocks said:
If anyone wants other sub-categories, feel free to suggest them.

- Alex
Click to expand...
Perhaps update the Later Apple subcategory to include up to the G4? G4 computers first released in 1999 - around the same time the Pentium III did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top