Hey folks,

I have quickly hacked out the "Topic Description" item from posts, in an attempt to make the posting screen less confusing and to encourage better topic titles -- and to discourage the practice of making a "funny" topic title that only makes sense if you read the description.

Let me know if you experience any problems with the changes.

Meh. I liked that second line. It's handy for longer topic titles. Perhaps you could just fix the currently seemingly defunct "guidlines" page and amend it to read "please make the topic relevant to your post".

Also, re: "only if you read the description", it's right under the title. How could you not read it if you're already reading something that's literally two mm north?

My $.02.

I'd like to cast my vote against this (not that it's a democracy)—the topic description, if used properly, provides valuable information that won't fit or should not go in a title.

~J

Two half-assed tools are better than one full-assed tool. After all, if one half-assed tool breaks down, you've still got the other half ass to work with.


I like the topic description line, personally. It's handy for when I run out of space on the main topic name.

i liked it too, i occassionly used it for some witty remark, but i feel my topics generally gave a good idea of what was going to be going on inisde.

Seriously, why do you want to discourage humour?

It's not so much an attempt to discourage humour, but to encourage good topic titles, which help make searching/referring to old posts more useful, and to help make Dumpshock less intimidating to new posters.

I thought Dumpshock's whole "thing" was the big and scary intimidating snobbish elitism? I worked hard to break into where I am, and now all of a sudden the road behind me is being paved with carebear stares and fluffy cotton candy?

*cries*

My only complaint is the basic topic title is always too short for me to properly explain what I'm talking about. If you're going to reduce it to one line, can you at least make it one long line?

gotcha

I think it's a bad idea, it won't solve the problem. Instead of having 2 lines to explain themselves, people now only have 1. That doesn't make things clearer.

People who don't use descriptive titles aren't going to start doing so because there is now less info fields to fill in.

I too enjoy the description field. It allows for an aside that can very often make a difference between me reading a topic or ignoring it. The forum has so many threads on very similar topics that the additional field gives authors the opportunity to hint at why their thread is unique.

Any chance you will reconsider?

I like the previous format. Two-lines titles are so much better.

Well, why not just make the amount of room we have for topic headings longer, then?

Bah, who cares? An informative title will get more views, and there's plenty of room for everything else in the post itself.

Either way is fine with me.

I like the "Nonfiction Impulse Buy" format of the threads; there's the novelty, then the explanation. And is it okay for me to start a "Fanpro and dumpshock conspiracy theories thread?"

I have one that I'm seriously considering. The geriatrics thread appeared on the exact same day as this announcement; that is way too much of a coincidence. I'm thinking that the thread was deliberately set up by the admins as a straw man to support the change. Thoughts?

I think you stopped taking your meds again.

THERE ARE NO COINKIDINKS!!!!

Right... but there is cause-effect.

Hume would disagree; cause and effect could only be determined by one thing happening after another multiple times, and at best, this is an educated guess. This has not happened multiple times.

Adam:

The links I was attempting to use to access the rules and guidlines are the ones in the "Welcome" sticky. They lead to a 404 not found.

I'll also toss my name in the "taking away the description line won't make emo's thread titles any clearer" hat.

Dude, that's not the problem with my threads. The problem with my threads is my threads. The titles, on the other hand, are very clear.

Although it isn't the only example, I think the trigger was probably the "Have you ever... Played..." thread. Absolutely nothing informative in the thread title. So much so that people were refusing to reply constructively because of it. Some of us refused to reply at all in the hopes it would quickly and quietly fade away, forcing a repost with a new title.

Well, the "trigger" was seeing two threads in the last few days where the subject line was poor, but instead of ignoring it, people chose to reply to the thread requesting that the subject line be better, and that generally derails the thread.

As I said earlier, this is an experiment; it can be undone. I'd like to give it a little longer than 24 hours, though.

eidolon: Thanks. Fixed it. Looks like a bunch of the "Welcome!" threads are way out of date anyway ... they were all done during a period years ago when I wasn't an admin. I'll dig through and make sure they're all up to date.

Np.

we should probably come up with some sort of unified concept of meta-data in the title such as the [<sub-category>] <title> concept used in other forms. That's probably a little advanced for the average casual surfer, but I have misguied faith in other things (like the idea that one day there will be no war )

Ew. The subcategory-in-braces format is ugly enough that it should be relegated to times of absolute necessity, IMO, not to mention that any extensive use requires enough time spent on the question to enumerate the choices beforehand…

~J

I would like to see more administrative action myself. If the title is that bad, admins should delete the thread and freeze the offenders account for 24 hours. It is a quick way to get people in line.

If you were going to change functionality, I would like to see a related/start new thread option for all of the bunny trails that really should be their own, but do require the context of the original. I know I am guilty of thread jacking, and bunny trails.

Is this change sticking? Because to be honest- though I've given it a while- I don't think it's working out. The titles don't seem to be getting clearer, and without the subtitles it's even harder to work out what threads are about. So the effect has been the opposite of what was intended.

I was kind of disapointed to see the subtitle line gone too. I mostly post in welcome to the shadows and when I GM (which is most of the time) I use the subtitle line to give hints/add color. But then again as far as I know I'm pretty clear about my titles, so I dunno. I can live without them, but that doesn't mean I won't miss them .

Now wether or not they fixed the vague title problem that is a bit tricky, because people who normally have clear titles still have them, but other folks who usually are vague still are, just to a slightly higher degree.

Now if you'd like to make some revisions, I have a few ideas, but I'll hold onto them until there is an admin posted "How would you change Dumpshock" thread.

I found the subtitles to be very useful and would like to see them appear again.

Thanks Adam.

Topic Descriptions are now back.

I know you liked it but...


THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU

I really loved using the description to spice my runs in Welcome.