I love that everyone is sharing ideas and options here based on differing forum experiences.  And I especially love SILLY!

In the composition box, I have to choose emoticons from the list instead of using a keyboard shortcut.  I don't know if that's just me or if that's something that we can ensure is possibe on WC2.  :)

There are infinite emoticon options and shortcuts. The number of options is rather annoying.

I can see those being enabled, though I personally hate emoticons. I know it's mostly just me. Hate 'em. Intensely. If only there was an emoticon to show how much I hate emoticons, but if there was, I wouldn't use it.

How can you hate them?! :(

lol

You may find that the challenge is that each of us thinks of our own ideas as being some of the non-silly ones.

Give me a few basic emoticons and I'm happy (smile, laugh, frown, wink, cool pretty much does it for me). Another board I'm on has like four pages of 'em with about 30 or so per page. Mercifully, there are keyboard shortcuts, e.g. typing ;) will get you their version of , so once you figure out which ones you use regularly, you can just memorize the shortcuts.

Mendalla

I personally don't really like any of those options for posting photos. Flickr is silly. It's like you tube with stills (and comnents). I won't use Facebook or Dropbox. Chemgal explained concerns with Picassa. I understand it's costly to have on WC2. That's been well explained. That's fine, I don't need to post photos.

chansen

I was checking out Xenforo for fun,  just the index. There's one feature there that I hate. If you use it on the forum  I hope it can be refused  or negated if somebody doesn't want it?  I was once reg.  on a forum not realizing this stupid feature was activated. I had a whole mail box full of emails from a  forum, just a nuisance to delete. Of course I changed my settings and got rid of it.

The only websites I have made  myself  are picture ones with some text like Piczo.com  which closed down, they left my memorial pages up. I did a new memorial on Tripod. These websites  are easy to do because I only had to figure out how to use the tools properly and drag the  pictures...:)

Make it easy for users to stay up to date with updates that are applicable to them. They'll receive alerts when someone quotes their post or responds to a status update.

When on a forum, is there a way to figure out what software they are using?

About a dozen or so is good I think...

smiley
frowny
laughy
kewly
thumbs up
thumbs down
sleepy
drunky
lit bomb
angry
rainbow
piece of pie
peace dove

Stardust, that's a user option.

I can usually tell by the layout.

I think I can recognize vBulletin.  If xenforo is similar though, I may very have the two confused.  I don't think I would recognize drupal.  There are other forums where I have zero clue.  I was hoping there would be a simple little trick to find out :)

WC is drupal, so we should know drupal, VBulletin I know from personalitycafe.com

I also have no idea what xenforo is like.

Jae, while I know WC, I don't know how similar other drupal sites would look.  I hadn't heard of drupal until it was bought up by Aaron.

vBulletin boards usually have vBulletin and the version number at the bottom of the screen.

eg. (from forum.rpg.net):

Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

The thing with Drupal is that it is not forum software like Xenforo and vBulletin. It is a "content management system" which means software for managing websites in a way that makes it easy for non-techie types to update content. Most Drupal sites would just be regular websites and you would not know they were running on Drupal unless they say so (e.g. my employer's website runs on Drupal but there is no way for a person visiting it to know that). This means that there is no specific look to Drupal sites. The UCCan customized Drupal to run forums. For WC2, we decided to go the easier route of using software specifically designed to run forums, which minimizes the cost and effort needed to set up the site.

Mendalla

Yep, running just a forum on Drupal is like running a marathon wearing hip waders. It's possible, but needlessly annoying and awkward.

Thanks for explaining the difference Mendalla.  I suspect some other forums I have used in the past are also on some content management systems too.

I'm guessing most of the forum software looks fairly similar, although with various differences it seems like there are quite a few that have a similar feel and then others are completely different, like WC.

Have you picked a platform for WC2

Ugh, I am writing really redundant sentences today.  Please ignore my poor writing.

XenForo.

The stylist is due to start on our site tomorrow.

Forum software is one of those things on the Web that has been around long enough to have a certain maturity to it. They all tend to do the same things in similar ways and look kind of similar. vBulletin is somewhat responsible for that since it was the dominant player for a period and competitors tended to emulate it. But there's also the basic fact that the market has been around long enough that people know what they want and have found the "best" way of doing it. You can customize the look of most of them to some extent but that mostly just affects cosmetic things like colours and fonts.

WC is very different because of the use of customized Drupal rather than forum software. WC2 will look more like a standard web forum since we are using forum software that came from the vBulletin lineage.

Mendalla

chemgal et al 

Here's a community Xenforo website, basic with no frills, just lots of info.

Man O man....these things sure look like lots of work to get up and running.

http://xenforo.com/community/forums/have-you-seen/?prefix_id=34

Here is what xenforo looks like...

http://www.xenforo.com/community/

The future look of WC2.

Stardust, I was just curious about some forums I do use though.  For example, could vBulletin or xenforo make a site like the knot?  It would obviously involve cost if they could.  I think I have a better understanding from Mendalla's post though, and sites like that aren't built with just forum software, even though they include forums.

Well, not really. XenForo can look like a lot of things, but yes, expect some of the same layout. The theme guy we have has been given artistic licence, but he's going to try to use this site and its colours as inspiration. Basically, we want an updated Wondercafe, he has been told.

Understand that we can't have everyone's input on this, or we'd drive the guy, and ourselves, crazy. And his cost would just go up. You'll have to trust us on this one, I guess.

Here's one place to look at all the possibilities with the software:

http://xenforo.com/community/forums/forum-showcase-and-critiques.53/

These are people showing off their forums. Some are good. Others are not.

Most importantly, Xenforo may just be the most stable and secure forum software around. At the end of the day, that's the most important thing.

Ooh, some nice forums on the site you linked to. Okay, I'm officially excited now.

Jae wrote (giving his thoughts about WC2 providing space for other faith backgrounds) - 

[/quote] Each party who wants to dine at the buffet should pay the same cost per plate.[/quote]

Sounds OK to me Jae. Though I doubt it will work quite like that - so far I haven't heard anything about a fee to join in the discussions.  Several people from the UC have offered to assist with the costs of WC2 (and some may want a forum for discussing UC matters).  How much is it worth to you to have space reserved for Baptist-based discussions?

Sounds OK to me Jae. Though I doubt it will work quite like that - so far I haven't heard anything about a fee to join in the discussions.  Several people from the UC have offered to assist with the costs of WC2 (and some may want a forum for discussing UC matters).  How much is it worth to you to have space reserved for Baptist-based discussions?

[/quote]

Any given Baptist denomination (or any given faith group) should have to pay no more, no less, than the UCCanada in order to have a separate discussion area in the new WC2 imho. I say this knowing that the consensus here on WC seems to be that the UCCanada ought to have special privileges even on the new WC2 not given to others. I disagree though. The new WC2 is an independent forum. While stemming from something started by the UCCanada, it will itself be something not directly connected to the UCCanada.

I think (hope?) we would only charge for banner ads or such. To simply have a forum for a specific faith group we might ask, at most, that the denomination/faith group link to the 'cafe. However, that is beyond the purview of this thread and my role as an admin. It is something for the WC2 community to decide once we have a governance structure in place. If the governing body and community thinks a financial contribution is necessary to have a dedicated forum, then so be it.

For my part, I would prefer to just keep the generic "Church Life" forum for a start and work on this separate forums by faith group idea more once WC2 is up.

Again, however, this discussion really belongs in the forum names thread, not the features thread.

http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/social/forum-names

Mendalla

Regardless of the other issues involved, the main reason I do not see a forum for your denomination Jae is that you need more than one person to hold a discussion.

It has nothing to do with cost.

However in the future I would welcome forums for other groups besides the UCC if there are members who would use it.  However do to the open minded discussions on WC, I suspect WC2 will be similar and thus likely on be able to attract liberal and progressive Baptists denominations. It may also happen due to their greater numbers that Anglicans, Catholics, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, and Muslims have their own section long before there are enough Baptist form your denomination.  

The idea as I understand a community board is the the different sections help people find topics of mutual interests (bottom up) rather than a top down model where the admin can determine what are the topics to be discussed

*cough cough*

http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/social/forum-names

Mendalla

An inquiry re Jae's thread above  about a  Baptist group:

You copied the link from the " names thread"  twice above  for Jae.

Is Jae supposed to move his post and inquiry  to the  forum names thread? Also Alex should have replied  on the "names"  thread..?.... or move his post there  also? (But Jae's  post wasn't moved to names  yet re Alex's response?)

You don't move it or a mod.?

Were you just telling Jae his post is in the wrong thread? I went there and nothing...zilch...so I'm just wondering how this works (or did I miss it?)

First time was for Jae. Second was for Alex's benefit since his post likely crossed with mine.

And I can't move things here because I'm not a mod here. Just you wait, though.  (I jest)

Mendalla

Edit:

Oops Mendalla.....sorry, perhaps you just meant Jae and Alex should read "the names" topic or link you posted?  It wasn't about moving it......:(..?

Mendalla....I gotcha....! You didn't graduate yet.

WC was started by the UCCan, at least here at WC1 the members are primarily UCCan, and if they offer links and redirects from a static WC1, then I think it's only fair and proper that we offer a place for UCCan discussion.

To provide forums for discussions about other denominations....I don't think would fly. At least, not on their own. The way new subforums should come about is there is existing discussion in a given forum, and you want to break it off. Just throwing up an empty subforum and hoping people come, leaves you with the possibility that no one will.

No, we don't have moderation or admin rights here. We will on WC2, not here. Here we only have Aaron for 2 hours a week.

Thx chansen.

Time to say at least a little.

I support an effective word processing format, by which we will be able to engage one another in conversation about those things that interest and concern us. A good text editor, permitting formatting of images and inserting of video.

Once we establish our abiity to host meaningful, respectful conversation, we may move on to the bells and whistles. I hope we do not get diverted from our primary purpose for carrying the hope forward.

George

Agreed, Geo Fee.

It is fun to dream, but like any project, it is important to focus on the basics.

Ah, chansen, I think it's amazing that even you want to keep us shackled so to the UCCanada. That just so doesn't seem like you. I would think you would want to be making things fair and even the same as I do. I have a pretty strong feeling now on which one of the triumvirate is really in control. I gotta' tell you, I think it's sad, chansen, sad.

Hi Jae...
.
I am not keen on explicit connection with the UCCan. Still, I am puzzled that you would consider yourself "shackled" in this present space. Have you not entered and participated freely? Is there anything in the conversation to this point suggesting that this freedom will be in any way curtailed?
.
George
.

Hi Dcn. Jae,

I think that things will be fair.  Church Life doesn't have to be a denominational forum.  Conversations within it can be denominationally specific.  If you and the other Fellowship Evangelical Baptists participating here want to start discussions that are very specific to your concerns there is nothing stopping you.

If you are going to make a complaint perhaps you could exhibit some courage and integrity and not make passive veiled inferences that you will later decline to clarify when pushed on it.

I gotta tell you, t think that is just cowardly.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Thank you GeoFee and RevJohn. Any more UCCanada ministers care to ring in on this?

Jae, I answered you in Pinga's thread.

Jae, I am sorry to say this, but you are a trouble maker and have been for years. Sad.....it is sad.

This thread is a perfect example of what I mean when I say that I never know when a thread will be interesting or what response it will have.  The day I posted it, I posted another on a topic that I thought would generate some interest and possibly some discussion.  I think it got about eight replies - half of them mine.

And this thread that I started when something popped into my head - I hoped for a reply or two to my suggeston (which I received) and that maybe one or two other people might have questions or suggestions about what they would like - and it took off.  It's now run for five pages, with more comments all the time.  Much of it is far more technical than I am able to follow, but obviously folks have questions and opinions and lots of information about forums and computer programs.  

Keep it coming.

And I will keep opening threads that I think might be interesting, and being surprised at which ones take off and which ones don't.

Seeler, this has been a great thread (mostly). Helps us admins gauge user expectations and lob a few ideas of our own out. Thanks for starting it.

And George, having a good editor was a high priority for me personally. I think you'll be happy with Xenforo on that front.

Mendalla

You'll be happy with the text editor, I'm quite sure.

Seeler, it is a good thread and it shows what a community we have.

Some of the asks come through here, some through other avenues, but, they drive the solution being provided....

In addition, you have admins who have been here for years as well, and suffered along with you.  As tech's, it was likely even more of a challenge as we know what it should do.

so, i am with the guys on this one, it is best when we hear lots of dreams...some will be just that, but there may be a really simple deliverable that was overlooked.  You dont' get if you don't ask