Suggested changes or additional features

[dazzling]

I think what Elly_C is referring to is if there is a feature to view most active members of the day (on some forums you get top 10 posters) - most overall active 10-15 posters.

Such features can be found on some forums home pages.

[Elly C]

Thanks Warren for the info which I didnt know about. Dazzling has referred to further feature which is another good idea,but as you say Warren I guess it depends on the software.

[MRSJ]

Does anyone know how to delete your own posts when you post using the ITouch App? I can edit them, but can't find how to delete them.

[Muhler]

The new look works fine for me. I actually like it.

My only complaint is that the board needs a major cleaning up.
There are way too many subfora and way too many topics within each subfora, which again have way too many threads within each topic.

To be honest, I have problems navigating around and often considerable problems figuring out where to post.

Keep it simple.

One royal family, one subforum. Everything about that family in that subforum. - (If people want to know something about, say Letizia's jewelry, they'll go to the Spanish royals forum. That's logic, isn't it?)

Within each subforum: max 5 main topics and 10-15 secondary topics.
And keep the number of threads within each topic to an absolute minimum. Preferably max 20 very general and very specialised threads.

People are not going through several pages of threads to find a place to post. It's as simple as that.
If there is more than one page of threads, people will end up posting in the most general thread on the first page. - All the other threads are ignored or overlooked.

[Lumutqueen]

I don't agree, I love all the forums and sub-forums - I find a new forum that interests me nearly every week. If people have the time, they'll look for the right thread.

However I like the idea of perhaps placing the Fashion/jewellery threads in each royal family section - but that might take a lot of effort to move them all over especially with non-reigning families.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

I don't agree, I love all the forums and sub-forums - I find a new forum that interests me nearly every week. If people have the time, they'll look for the right thread.

You nailed it, Lumutqueen.

If people have the time, they will eventually find something. Agree.
But many people don't have that much time. They may log in for half an hour every two days. - Where they keep themselves updated on their favourite topics/royals.
It doesn't help having all sorts of post about specific royals spread out all over the board. Keep them together, so that they are easier to find.

Another matter: I want to reread about something my favourite royal did a couple of years ago, say an event. I remember it took place in the summer of 2009. That was before I became a member, now where do I locate that stuff? If there are a zillion threads it's pretty difficult to spot the right one and even easier to miss it. - So I end up by giving up or posting a question and taking up space in a general thread.

I propose a reform.
Say this is a subforum about a royal family.
The main characters constitute the 5 or so main topics.

Since I'm Danish, let's pretend this is the Frederik & Mary main topic.
Within that topic are a number secondary topics/threads:
1: M&F on the job together in 2011. (You could even subdivide that under months, if it becomes too big a thread on its own).
2: M on the job alone in 2011.
3: F on the job alone in 2011.
4: General stuff (i.e. not on the job) about M&F in 2011.
5: Fashion about F.
6: Mary's jewelry and accessories.
7: Mary's fashion.
8: M&F's children in general in 2011.
9: All sorts of other subjects not covered by a specific topic. Like Ziggy.
10: General and more factual info about M&F. I.e. patronacies (spll.) and affilliations to specific organisations.
11: Major events involving M&F in 2011. I.e. official visits lasting several days, and similar events where a lot of focus where put on them in particular, like anniversaries or christenings.
12: M&F's friends.
13: M&F's personal staff. Like Mary's LiW.
14: Books, portraits and major general interviews.
That should cover most.

You see my point? So few threads as at all possible and keeping those threads as general as possible.
If there are more than 20-25 threads people will simply get confused and miss some threads.
And just as importantly; it'll make it a lot easier for the poor posters to figure out where to post.

[Warren]

I understand what you're getting at in terms of time but we approach forum and thread content from a different angle. We would like to think that much of the content posted by members forms an historical record or archive which can be readily acessed now and in the future. There are other Message Boards which contain accurate and reliable information but many of them don't retain posts permanently. TRF does, and we now have a continuous record of royal events stretching back to 2003-2004.

The structure of TRF can be likened to a library. As the volume of posted material increases there are more books on the shelves so to speak. The more topics that are readily identifiable, the more discussion there will be. We now have about 13,000 threads and closing in on one million posts. It is essential that we break up general topics just as we have broken up larger forums (eg the former 'The Balkans' subforum has been split into separate Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia subforums; what was once a 'Royal and Princely Houses of Germany and Austria' thread is now a separate subforum with individual threads for many of the families). To use the British Forums as another example, the annual Garter Ceremony, Royal Ascot, Trooping the Colour, Chelsea Flower Show, Remembrance Day, Christmas etc have individual threads. Charles and Camilla have individual and joint current events threads as well as a thread each for their activities relating to their patronages. There are separate threads on the Prince of Wales title, the Duchy of Cornwall and the POW's pet projects such as the environment, alternative medicine, urban planning, rainforest protection etc. Many of these threads could be lumped into a "Queen Elizabeth II activities" or "POW activities" thread but they would be a mishmash of different topics with interesting discussions quickly becoming lost or crowded out.

As the volume of posts has risen we've increased the "standard" thread length from 10 pages to anywhere between 25-30, and often more. All current events threads now have start and end dates in the title line to make access and research quicker and easier. To rationalise storage in the major forums, current events threads that have been closed for 12 months are moved to a 'Current Events Archive' within each forum.

The Forum structure is also a reflection of member interest and knowledge. Thus we have separate forums for jewels, fashion, media and genealogy. Threads relating to Danish royal jewellery, Danish royal fashion, Danish royal books and documentaries and Danish royal genealogy could be moved to the Danish forum but each is a subject in its own right attracting members with a general interest and/or expertise. Therefore it's considered appropriate to have these 'stand-alone' forums that are quite separate from the Royal Houses home forums.

I agree that having a large number of topic-specific threads rather than a smaller number of general threads can be confusing for members who don't know where they should make their post. However, the Moderators know how their forums are organised and what threads they contain and it's a simple enough procedure for them to move a post or posts from one thread to another.

Although being pressed for time is a common condition, it can pay off to spend a couple of minutes every so often scanning through the list of threads in a forum or subforum. Who knows, members may come across a topic of personal interest that instead of being "lost" in a general thread had been moved into a thread of its own. That in itself generated further discussion and allowed that discussion to develop over a longer period of time. As a result the member is presented with an ongoing discussion containing a wider variety of opinions and greater depth.

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Muhler

Since I'm Danish, let's pretend this is the Frederik & Mary main topic.
Within that topic are a number secondary topics/threads:
1: M&F on the job together in 2011. (You could even subdivide that under months, if it becomes too big a thread on its own).
2: M on the job alone in 2011.
3: F on the job alone in 2011.
4: General stuff (i.e. not on the job) about M&F in 2011.
5: Fashion about F.
6: Mary's jewelry and accessories.
7: Mary's fashion.
8: M&F's children in general in 2011.
9: All sorts of other subjects not covered by a specific topic. Like Ziggy.
10: General and more factual info about M&F. I.e. patronacies (spll.) and affilliations to specific organisations.
11: Major events involving M&F in 2011. I.e. official visits lasting several days, and similar events where a lot of focus where put on them in particular, like anniversaries or christenings.
12: M&F's friends.
13: M&F's personal staff. Like Mary's LiW.
14: Books, portraits and major general interviews.
That should cover most.

See I was thinking;
Danish Royal family -
Queen M & H
Prince F & M
Prince J & M
Danish Royal Fashion Thread
Danish Royal Jewellery Thread

- then the threads you suggested could apply to all the DRF.
- Also the extra threads that apply to the whole family could be limited to say the royal calendar, major family events and state visits etc.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

See I was thinking;
Danish Royal family -
Queen M & H
Prince F & M
Prince J & M
Danish Royal Fashion Thread
Danish Royal Jewellery Thread

- then the threads you suggested could apply to all the DRF.
- Also the extra threads that apply to the whole family could be limited to say the royal calendar, major family events and state visits etc.

Yes, that doesn't look bad.
Better than than mine in fact, because I know many are not that interested in what the specific royals are doing, but rather in comparing fashion. And having such a main thread on the "front page" sounds like a good idea to me.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by Warren

I understand what you're getting at in terms of time but we approach forum and thread content from a different angle. We would like to think that much of the content posted by members forms an historical record or archive which can be readily acessed now (1) and in the future. There are other Message Boards which contain accurate and reliable information but many of them don't retain posts permanently. TRF does, and we now have a continuous record of royal (2) events stretching back to 2003-2004.

(3) The structure of TRF can be likened to a library. As the volume of posted material increases there are more books on the shelves so to speak. The more topics that are readily identifiable, the more discussion (4) there will be. We now have about 13,000 threads and closing in on one million posts. It is essential that we break up general topics just as we have broken up larger forums (eg the former 'The Balkans' subforum (5) has been split into separate Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia subforums; what was once a 'Royal and Princely Houses of Germany and Austria' thread is now a separate subforum with individual threads for many of the (6) families). To use the British Forums as another example, the annual Garter Ceremony, Royal Ascot, Trooping the Colour, Chelsea Flower Show, Remembrance Day, Christmas etc have individual threads. Charles and Camilla have individual and joint current events threads as well as a thread each for their activities relating to their patronages. There are separate threads on the Prince of Wales title, the Duchy of Cornwall and the POW's pet projects such as the environment, alternative medicine, urban planning, rainforest protection etc. Many of these threads could be lumped into a "Queen Elizabeth II activities" or "POW activities" thread but they would be a mishmash of different topics with interesting discussions quickly becoming lost or crowded out.

(7) As the volume of posts has risen we've increased the "standard" thread length from 10 pages to anywhere between 25-30, and often more. All current events threads now have start and end dates in the title line to make access and research quicker and easier. To rationalise storage in the major forums, current events threads that have been closed for 12 months are moved to a 'Current Events Archive' within each forum.

(8) The Forum structure is also a reflection of member interest and knowledge. Thus we have separate forums for jewels, fashion, media and genealogy. Threads relating to Danish royal jewellery, Danish royal fashion, Danish royal books and documentaries and Danish royal genealogy could be moved to the Danish forum but each is a subject in its own right attracting members with a general interest and/or expertise. Therefore it's considered appropriate to have these 'stand-alone' forums that are quite separate from the Royal Houses home forums.

I agree that having a large number of topic-specific threads rather than a smaller number of general threads can be confusing for members who
(9) don't know where they should make their post. However, the
(10) Moderators know how their forums are organised and what threads they contain and it's a simple enough procedure for them to move a post or posts from one thread to another.

(11) Although being pressed for time is a common condition, it can pay off to spend a couple of minutes every so often scanning through the list of threads in a forum or subforum. Who knows, members may come across a topic of personal interest that instead of being "lost" in a general thread had been moved into a thread of its own. That in itself generated further discussion and allowed that discussion to develop over a longer period of time. As a result the member is presented with an ongoing discussion containing a wider variety of opinions and greater depth.

Thank you for reply, Warren.

I've allowed myself to put numbers in bold in your post to keep it simple.

(1) I don't see that as a problem using my proposal.
In fact dividing the various official threads of the royals into years, say from 2011-20XX would make it easier.
If you combine that with a weekly "diary" which list the various events of a family, it should be possible to flip through that "diary" for each year and figure out where a specific event is most likekly to be covered. (You can even add links in the diary).
I'm willing to start writing such a "diary" for the DRF, in a trial period, to show what I mean.

(2) So much the more reason to clean up, or rather reduce the number of topics to be opened from now on.
That could be done from a specific date. say 1. July. From then on only the new topics will be used, all other loose threads will be locked. - It's unlikely posts are made in those threads anyway. It's very rarely I've seen new posts in threads going back several years. Except for the historical threads/topics.

(3) Yes, but where is the table of contents (for the individual families)? Having a list of threads filling several pages makes it hard to get an overview.

(4) Way too many threads in my opinion. Keep in mind that this board is thriwing and expanding. It's almost impossible for a new member to plough through even those subfora which involves a few families. Let alone those who look for something specific.
You will eventually have to establish an "archivist section" where members can ask where to locate a specific piece of info and enthusiasts will dig it up.
I realise that there are those who enjoy exploring the forum and finding new stuff and that is indeed fun if you have the time. But what about those who wish to know about something about XX attending an event a couple of years ago or XX's affilliation to something specific?

(5) Fine. That's a sign that the forum is thriwing. And increasing the number of subfora only makes it easier to find something specific. It the main topics within these subforas that I believe needs to be looked at.

(6) Fair enough. What may be practical for a fairly small royal family as the DRF, may not be ideal for a larger and perhaps more high profile family as the BRF.
That would basically be up to the members who focus a lot on the BRF.
Another family, which may be in exile or simple very small, or there is simply not enough attention on that family, could be organised in a way that is even simpler than the one I have proposed for the DRF.
My point is: Keep it as simple as possible and the number of threads down.

(7) No problem. Move all topics labbled with a year, like: "Mary, official events, July, August & September 2011" to the archive after a year.

(8) Put up a links section on the front page and lock it. It will take some work to set up, but that is work saved in the end, because you don't have to move post from a subforum about a specific family to another forum about, say jewelry.
People can look at the links and simply click and go to where their topic of interest is located. And those who are interested in a specific family don't have to plough through the general section in order to figure out where for example Mary's fashion is.

(9) That's a big problem! It's also a problem for those who wish to follow a debate that may be the reaction to a post, only to discover that that post is gone... And who was it who posted that and that?

(10) Good. But that puts a strain on the moderators. Who has to deal with moving post around all the time and answering questions from the members about: where is the post about XX?
The moderators do have lives outside the forum I presume.

(11) Indeed. The problem is when you wish to find something specific.
I often find myself in the situation, where I wish to back up what I'm saying or verify what I'm saying by going back and refer to previous posts. - If I'm lucky I can find it pretty easily. But often I find I have to narrow my search down to 10-15 threads which I'll have to go through. I mostly don't have the time to do that, so I give up and rely on either my personal archive or just post a fairly vaque reference.

[Warren]

I won't go into a detailed response at the moment but after having a quick look at the Danish forum I agree there's an opportunity for a good clean-up and consolidation. I'm not keen on older threads that have a few posts, or in some cases, no posts apart from the opening post. A scan of the F&M 'Threads in Forum' listing shows an over-enthusiasm for the creation of threads for individual patronages, with some threads having no new posts for over five years. In other words your observation on the excessive number of threads is perfectly valid.

I'll leave this particular issue with the Danish Mods to work through as their time allows.

[LauraS3514]

I use the "new posts" button when I come to the Forum, and then the down-arrows on the threads I want to read. Before the change, I could go through all five pages (or whatever it was that visit) and read the new posts I wanted. Since the change, occasionally I will get a message while I'm reading my new posts saying something like "threads have been updated and may contain unread posts". When that happens, the down-arrow for just unread posts goes away, and I have to guess where to start. That's been a little frustrating, especially for topics that have suddenly become "hot". Is there a way to change this? I'm a member of similar-style boards that don't update while in the "new posts" mode so I know it's possible.

One other little thing that I'm sure is probably out of your control: as a newcomer to the board and a new member (in the last month) I've spent time going back over old posts. One frustrating thing is that so many of the linked pictures are no longer available on the older posts. Is there any way to archive pictures anywhere, or are they just gone?

I've really enjoyed my discovery of this board even though I'll probably spend the vast majority of my time lurking. This is my first post since joining, and it WOULD have to be here ...

LauraS

[MRSJ]

Any chance on the RF app there could be a way to delete your posts- it's hard to see the thread names and sometimes I post in wrong place?

[Osipi]

This might be really trivial but I'm thinking that perhaps instead of a "last unread" link, it should be "last message posted". Perhaps this is something that is being worked on but I find when I click the "last unread", it takes me to the last message posted. When it has been a while since I've read a certain thread, I find myself having to go back and fish for the last message I did read.

Is it just me?

[crisscross1]

Hi all,
I would like to start a new thread but can't figure out how to. I went to FAQ and it says that "I should simply click on the Start Thread button".
I would if I could find it. Having searched for some time I have to admit defeat. If someone could point me in the general direction of the elusive Start Thread button, I would be most grateful.
Thanks

[JessRulz]

If you go into the forum/sub-forum where you wish to create a new thread, and then look to the top left-hand side of the forum listings, you should see a blue 'New Thread' button:

[crisscross1]

Thanks JessRulz,
I think that is where the problem lies....mine says Reply not New Thread.

[JessRulz]

When you are looking at an already existing thread, it will say 'Reply' instead of 'New Thread' - meaning if you hit that button, you will reply to the thread you are viewing. Once you get out on to the forum page (where the threads are listed), it should change to 'New Thread'.

[crisscross1]

Originally Posted by JessRulz

When you are looking at an already existing thread, it will say 'Reply' instead of 'New Thread' - meaning if you hit that button, you will reply to the thread you are viewing. Once you get out on to the forum page (where the threads are listed), it should change to 'New Thread'.

You are being very patient and I appreciate that but.....I still can't see it. I have started at the very beginning page and gone through each step checking that top left hand spot but still nothing.

[Duchess of Darwin]

I have a few emotiocon suggstions (apologies for the lack of sources. I'm not an expert at geting things like emotiocons):

-Nodding
-Drooling
-Excited (something like this elephant they have at Ultimatedisney:DVDizzy.com / UltimateDisney.com Forum :: View topic - Monsters Inc. 2 )
-Group hug (like the third one across in this Google result:Cuddling Emoticons - Google Search)
-Talking alot
-Moving ones for tongue and eye roll.

What does everyone think about these suggestions?