IMPORTANT POLL: New Forum Categories / Reorg

[Wuerstchenhund]

There should (should - the SMF docs are ... not good...) be a couple options related to page size:
- Topic Settings / Maximum messages to display in a topic page <- I guess this is the one we are looking for

No such option.

Strange, but then I'm not very familiar with the current versions of SMF, so I guess they got rid of it (since it was somewhat redundant anyways, see 'Max number of replies in a topic to show "All" posts')

- Topic Settings / Number of posts per page in a topic page  <- And this is probably what changed the default for everyone

Correct, I changed that to 25.

25 is a good as a default.

- Topic Settings / Max number of replies in a topic to show "All" posts <- "Set this to the maximum number of posts a topic can have to show the all link. Setting this lower than "Maximum messages to display in a topic page" will simply mean it never gets shown, and setting it too high could slow down your forum." ... I guess setting this high enough enables a view where the entire topic is on one page or something like that.

This option is there, and it sounds like it works like that.
I set it to both 20 and 50 (above and below my default) and it did nothing.
I set it to 500 and I got the All button on this thread with 6 pages, but not on another huge thread like the Batteriser.
And curiously, when you hit all, it still keep the pages numbers there, although it does seem to display them all.
So a strange option,

Not at all. It allows the admin to limit the max number of messages shown on one page, which is pretty much what the first parameter did (which seems to be gone now). It's sensible that "All" is not displayed if the message count is below a certain value (there's no point offering "All" on a thread with three messages). it's also sensible to show the page numbers, as it allows the user to go back to the default (25 in this case) easily.

A setting of 500 however is still low, but it's a first improvement so for the moment I'll stop complaining 

it only works on threads that are not too big and not too small, but I guess that makes sense because you don't want one person hitting All on the Batteriser thread and killing the server.

Seriously, if one person hitting "All" on that thread kills your server then you have some other, more pressing problems in your infrastructure.

[EEVblog]

Seriously, if one person hitting "All" on that thread kills your server then you have some other, more pressing problems in your infrastructure.

I was being a bit melodramatic. The point being that it could really affect things.
The forum database gets 114 requests per second, 6837 per minute, 410239 per hour, 24/7/365

[EEVblog]

But once a thread gets too big, you get no option at all.

Which is actually what you want (don't 'All' the batteriser thread) and what you did set here:

I set it to 500 and I got the All button on this thread with 6 pages, but not on another huge thread like the Batteriser.

The point is that once a thread gets too big, you go from being able to see 500 at once, to the maximum user setting value of 50 per page.

[AF6LJ]

I just increased the number of topics displayed on the index page to 40, that seems to make sense.

Thanks Dave, Looks Great 

[PA0PBZ]

The point is that once a thread gets too big, you go from being able to see 500 at once, to the maximum user setting value of 50 per page.

I see what you mean, but as long as the "Maximum messages to display in a topic page" keeps hiding from you there is not much you can do.
If you find the setting you could add a 100 and 500 option so anyone could decide for themselves to always have the 'superpage' turned on.

[Muttley Snickers]

Slightly off topic, I wondered if there was any particular reason why some people feel the need to change the thread title on the fly, it shows up in the recent posts list as the amended title, what am I missing, I don't get it.

[PA0PBZ]

Slightly off topic, I wondered if there was any particular reason why some people feel the need to change the thread title on the fly, it shows up in the recent posts list as the amended title, what am I missing, I don't get it.

If you hit 'reply' it kind of encourages you to do that, it is the first editable field and it looks like an email subject. I wonder why it is possible to change the title at all, I don't think there is a valid reason to do so apart from the op.

[Richard Crowley]

Slightly off topic, I wondered if there was any particular reason why some people feel the need to change the thread title on the fly, it shows up in the recent posts list as the amended title, what am I missing, I don't get it.

I have seen a great many really valuable threads here and in other forums that were crippled right out of the chute by inane, inept, or incorrect titles. Sometimes the OP is a newbie who doesn't even understand what question they need to ask. Sometimes they ask about something irrelevant, but discussion discovers the Real issue and changing the thread subject/title is very valuable to aid in alerting people who can help, as well as identifying the real subject so that people who come later can find valuable information. And making accurate, searchable archives is at least half the whole purpose of forums like this.

[Brumby]

+1 

[PA0PBZ]

...and changing the thread subject/title is very valuable to aid in alerting people who can help, as well as identifying the real subject so that people who come later can find valuable information. And making accurate, searchable archives is at least half the whole purpose of forums like this.

That's why I said "apart from OP." I don't see a need for someone else to change the title halfway in the thread, it will not reflect into the first post anyway so the thread title stays the same.

[AlxDroidDev]

I'd like to suggest an area on circuit simulators: TINA, LTSpice, Multisim and others.

[Stonent]

The forum changes look fine on Chrome in Windows, but do not like the changes to the mobile site on Chrome for android.  For some reason the PCB/EDA section is fully expanded by default and I have to scroll up and down to try to find other things.  It just really gets in the way of the other stuff I'd be more likely to use.

[nowlan]

I've sometimes encouraged people to update the thread title so it is more descriptive of the topic. "Another success story" is no help to someone searching on a thread about a device with a specific model number. Some people can be quite thoughtless (or just lazy) about choosing a thread title for easy searching later.

I think any thread that lacks a noun (proper) should be rejected. Is just click bait titles, and hopeless for searching. Although a full text search might lead to some pearls inside.

[Wuerstchenhund]

@Dave: I really think the Ham Radio aspect should be removed from 'RF, Microwave, HAM Radio' in the 'Electronics' section.

The reason is that this is a new group intended to be a place for discussing RF related topics and projects but it is already spawning more and more off-topic HAM Radio related discussions which have nothing to do with RF (i.e. UK callsigns, Aucklangs callsigns), and there's a real danger that over time the group will end up being over-run by off-topic threads which takes away from it's original purpose.

Also, I'm not sure why HAM Radio needs (or even deserves) to be mentioned specifically as it's just one of many fields related to RF.

My suggestion is to change the group name to 'RF & Microwave' and move the off-topic threads into another area (i.e. 'General Chat') which is more appropriate for these topics.

[Kilrah]

Slightly off topic, I wondered if there was any particular reason why some people feel the need to change the thread title on the fly, it shows up in the recent posts list as the amended title, what am I missing, I don't get it.

This is supposed to be your post's own title/subject. It doesn't change the thread title, it just defaults to "Re: Thread Title" because that's most likely what your answer will be about.

[cdev]

@Dave: I really think the Ham Radio aspect should be removed from 'RF, Microwave, HAM Radio' in the 'Electronics' section.

The reason is that this is a new group intended to be a place for discussing RF related topics and projects but it is already spawning more and more off-topic HAM Radio related discussions which have nothing to do with RF (i.e. UK callsigns, Aucklangs callsigns), and there's a real danger that over time the group will end up being over-run by off-topic threads which takes away from it's original purpose.

Also, I'm not sure why HAM Radio needs (or even deserves) to be mentioned specifically as it's just one of many fields related to RF.

My suggestion is to change the group name to 'RF & Microwave' and move the off-topic threads into another area (i.e. 'General Chat') which is more appropriate for these topics.

I think this is a really good point. If there is a "ham radio" specific forum here, it should be separate from the RF/microwave forum.

[Syntax_Error]

I don't have an opinion either way on this, but I would comment that it would be nice to see more RF topics in that forum, since that's what it is for. If technical discussion activity picked up some, perhaps the first five threads wouldn't be all ham related. If those ham threads weren't there, there would be about....zero activity at all.

Note that I do support your position to safeguard the technical aspect of RF in that forum. I agree that ham-related idle chit chat belongs in General Chat. I think technical discussion, ham related or not, belongs in the RF forum. The issue is appropriate topics, not "hams go over there, away from me."

[Wuerstchenhund]

I don't have an opinion either way on this, but I would comment that it would be nice to see more RF topics in that forum, since that's what it is for. If technical discussion activity picked up some, perhaps the first five threads wouldn't be all ham related. If those ham threads weren't there, there would be about....zero activity at all.

I disagree. There's no problem with a new sub-forum seeing very little activity for a while, and the lack of genuine on-topic posts is certainly no excuse to spam it with off-topic stuff. And even if the traffic is low then that's fine, because there's no reason a sub-forum would need a lot of posts to be viable.

On the other side, tolerating the off-topic stuff will only lead to even less genuine RF-related posts.

Note that I do support your position to safeguard the technical aspect of RF in that forum. I agree that ham-related idle chit chat belongs in General Chat. I think technical discussion, ham related or not, belongs in the RF forum. The issue is appropriate topics, not "hams go over there, away from me."

But ham-related discussions around RF would still fit into the forum, even when "Ham Radio" wasn't explicitly mentioned in its name.

The issue is that "Ham Radio" in the title actually suggests that everything ham radio related is on-topic, even the chit chat.

That's why I'm suggesting to remove "Ham Radio" from title and description of the RF sub-forum.

[Richard Crowley]

That's why I'm suggesting to remove "Ham Radio" from title and description of the RF sub-forum.

I agree. It makes the scope of the topic much more clear.
Ham radio topics related to technical RF issues are clearly in-scope, while social chit-chat should go elsewhere.

[AlxDroidDev]

That's why I'm suggesting to remove "Ham Radio" from title and description of the RF sub-forum.

I agree. It makes the scope of the topic much more clear.
Ham radio topics related to technical RF issues are clearly in-scope, while social chit-chat should go elsewhere.

+1 Just add a "Ham radio lounge" sub-forum so the non-technical posts can go in there

[apelly]

I'm a bit late to this party, but two things:

1) How about a restoration forum? I know a lot of us are interested in that.

2) I have created some of the HAM noise in the RF sub-forum. When I started those threads I chose that forum because I figured people interested in HAM would be looking there. A 'HAM lounge' is an excellent idea. It's not too late to change.

[tautech]

I'm a bit late to this party, but two things:

1) How about a restoration forum? I know a lot of us are interested in that.

2) I have created some of the HAM noise in the RF sub-forum. When I started those threads I chose that forum because I figured people interested in HAM would be looking there. A 'HAM lounge' is an excellent idea. It's not too late to change.

There's a sticky thread in the Repair board:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/vintageclassic-renovation-techniques/

[joeqsmith]

Like the added forums and added length to the what's new.   

Any thoughts to adding a forum for mechanical designs?   As an electronic hobbyist, most of my projects have a mechanical side to them.   This can be simple things like bending a custom metal enclosure, strain relief, mounting parts to welding, machining and even attempting to use FEA.   

Some sub-topics could be recommend tools and construction techniques.  As a hobbyist, we may not have the room to hold a full machine shop and look for things like small bench lathes and mills. 

Maybe something to consider.

[tautech]

Dave, don't do anything too rash like the plonkers here did over the last couple of days:
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/

That forum was down for 24+ hrs and still not right.

They had a perfectly good SMF forum much like yours and nuked it for the POS they have now.
Avatars gone, User names reverted to actual names  , post #'s gone, a lottery if you quote a post if it comes out right....
A right proper mess.

These guys ^^^ have long sorted out their forum changeover mess and there is much I like about the accurateshooter forum and the software they use.
https://xenforo.com/
You get automatic notifications of replies as "alerts" in a drop down box where you can select the reply you wish to read. If following a thread but not posting in it a click on the title takes you to your first unread post. 
Hovering over a thread title creates a popup displaying the content of the OP and if it's not of interest you just move on.
I guess it's hosted in the US but I haven't pinged it to check latency against this forum however it's faster to load and browse than EEVblog for me on my piss poor DSL connection.
It maybe more has to do with our "pipes", we have a fairly new fibre connection to the US via Hawaii but that makes you wonder as the distance from NZ to Aus is probably 1/4 of that to the US.