Community Feedback: how can the site improve?

[SH03L4C3]

Hey, @pjk ...
I'm going to post essentially the same question I posed to Mike Hughey in the Cubing Ducks thread here:

Could we have a duck reaction?
Like, in addition to the ones we have now (Like, Love, Haha, Wow, Meh, Eyes Up, Confused, Sad, Angry), could we have a reaction emoji that looks like a duck? Drawception already does a similar thing, and we have a community of around 10-15 Cubing Ducks on SpeedSolving.com now. If you could please consider this, I'd love to hear your feedback on it!

- @White KB, on behalf of the Cubing Ducks thread participants

Might as well add a pineapple pizza reaction while we are at it

 

[qwr]

We should have a dislike reaction.

I remember thinking this when I used Facebook about a decade ago when they only had Likes. Would be really funny to spam someone with dislikes.

 

[SH03L4C3]

I remember thinking this when I used Facebook about a decade ago when they only had Likes. Would be really funny to spam someone with dislikes.

instead of dislikes, we could have a more meaningful reaction, because we will get a lot of "edit: Why the dislike?"

 

[qwr]

instead of dislikes, we could have a more meaningful reaction, because we will get a lot of "edit: Why the dislike?"

that's where eyes up, angry face, sad face, disappointed face comes in

 

[SH03L4C3]

but what aboiut a

that's where eyes up, angry face, sad face, disappointed face comes in

no instead of dislike. That would have many more uses than dislike, and it can be used as a dislike

 

[xyzzy]

1. You can redesign the home page. (Sorry if I'm complaining) It looks a little too plain and old.

I don't know what you have in mind but anything like any of the modern social media websites (Twitter, Facebook, (new) Reddit, YouTube, …) is complete garbage. It might look "pretty", but those websites are also barely functional. Plain and old is good.

(For that matter, it's not like the current Xenforo theme looks that dated anyway.)

 

[CubeRed]

I don't know what you have in mind but anything like any of the modern social media websites (Twitter, Facebook, (new) Reddit, YouTube, …) is complete garbage. It might look "pretty", but those websites are also barely functional. Plain and old is good.

(For that matter, it's not like the current Xenforo theme looks that dated anyway.)

It also gives us a sense of history. You wouldn't know how much old youtube was if you weren't told.

 

[SH03L4C3]

It also gives us a sense of history. You wouldn't know how much old youtube was if you weren't told.

back in MY day...

 

[Deleted member 36445]

back in MY day...

 

[qwr]

What is the format for WR/CR/NR video solves titles? Should the thread prefix be used for high ranking but not #1s, like WR2?

 

[CFOP INC]

Are we ever going to get the duck reaction?

 

[Deleted member 36445]

Are we ever going to get the duck reaction?

 

[ender9994]

What is the format for WR/CR/NR video solves titles? Should the thread prefix be used for high ranking but not #1s, like WR2?

It seems a little odd to tag a solve as a WR or CR or NR if it is not actually a record, but only because I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. The actual record? Top 5?

 

[qwr]

It seems a little odd to tag a solve as a WR or CR or NR if it is not actually a record, but only because I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. The actual record? Top 5?

I guess it is a record in the way a bronze metal is a record, not the record.

 

[CubeRed]

I think it would be good if there is an option to schedule posts. It would be good for updates or livestream schedules.

 

[EngiNerdBrian]

Has the search engine for the forums changed recently? I've had a hard time searching for threads or posts using keywords lately. I have noticed that when I type the names of threads they are not appearing as top results as they used to. This happens even if I use the exact characters that make up thread titles.

Below is an example, I searched "One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations" which is an exact character for character match of the "One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations Thread" without the "Thread" but it appears as the 8th result which is annoying, makes navigating the site harder and overall less enjoyable.

Has anyone else noticed this? I do see the option to search "Posts" or "Images" but I typically get around the site by searching for threads by name. Am I alone here or are others experiencing this lately too? I've been away from the forums for about 4-5 months so I'm not sure when this started.

 

[SH03L4C3]

Has the search engine for the forums changed recently? I've had a hard time searching for threads or posts using keywords lately. I have noticed that when I type the names of threads they are not appearing as top results as they used to. This happens even if I use the exact characters that make up thread titles.

Below is an example, I searched "One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations" which is an exact character for character match of the "One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations Thread" without the "Thread" but it appears as the 8th result which is annoying, makes navigating the site harder and overall less enjoyable.

Has anyone else noticed this? I do see the option to search "Posts" or "Images" but I typically get around the site by searching for threads by name. Am I alone here or are others experiencing this lately too? I've been away from the forums for about 4-5 months so I'm not sure when this started.

View attachment 17829

Yeah that happened with the last big update a few months ago

 

[White KB]

I think that we should abolish the character limit in profile posts, or at least extend the limit, as long as the post is on the poster's profile.
Dealing with a 420 character limit is somewhat frustrating when you're trying to say something important and can't fit it all into one post, and while I realize that this is probably to protect from spam, I think that we should have a bigger character limit or limit based on word count, or even abolish the limit outright.
It would only have to be when one is posting things on their profile, as you wouldn't want someone posting the entire text of A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens on random peoples' profiles; that would be ridiculous.

In conclusion, I propose that we extend the limit for one post to no less than five hundred [500] words (which shall henceforth be interpreted as one [1] subtracted from the spaces between all words in a post), but only in the case that the poster is posting on their own personal profile. This limit, which was heretofore four hundred twenty [420] characters, shall henceforth serve the original purpose of the limit: to protect from excessive and unnecessary messages while also maintaining freedom in speech and communication on SpeedSolving.com.

Legalese amirite

 

[cuberswoop]

I think that we should abolish the character limit in profile posts, or at least extend the limit, as long as the post is on the poster's profile.
Dealing with a 420 character limit is somewhat frustrating when you're trying to say something important and can't fit it all into one post, and while I realize that this is probably to protect from spam, I think that we should have a bigger character limit or limit based on word count, or even abolish the limit outright.
It would only have to be when one is posting things on their profile, as you wouldn't want someone posting the entire text of A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens on random peoples' profiles; that would be ridiculous.

In conclusion, I propose that we extend the limit for one post to no less than five hundred [500] words (which shall henceforth be interpreted as one [1] subtracted from the spaces between all words in a post), but only in the case that the poster is posting on their own personal profile. This limit, which was heretofore four hundred twenty [420] characters, shall henceforth serve the original purpose of the limit: to protect from excessive and unnecessary messages while also maintaining freedom in speech and communication on SpeedSolving.com.

here, here!

 

[7ombie]

The rich text support works, but some things are pretty clunky. For example, trying to position images is horrible (even using tables), and the text doesn't flow around the images very well. It's not the end of the world, but may be worth considering.

> I propose that we extend the limit for one post to no less than five hundred [500] words

@White KB - Whatever the upperbound, I still think it should be character-based (not word-based), as characters are more easily defined when trying to prevent abuse. In practice, it would actually be simpler to define a byte limit (depending on how they're encoded, Unicode characters often use multiple bytes). Either way, there are a hundred ways to hack Unicode to render legible text (with apparent spaces) without ever using the ASCII Space Character.

I don't know how many characters are in the average word, but it's probably about 6 or something, so if we multiply that by 500, we get a few thousand. Then, rounding that up to a power of two gives a 4,096 byte limit.