IIRC, we discovered that making better forum software involved giving end-users more options and preferences to control their experience. Unfortunately, optionitis normally serves a quite small minority of users; witness how many people never change the default colours in Windows... I personally don't like the format of the Yahoo Groups - it is definitely put in the shade by zIWETHEY - but I can envisage many people happy with it because they have no idea that it could be so much better. Of course, I can also envisage Yahoo actually wanting it less than the absolute best, but that's a topic for another message.

Well, I was sooooo spoiled on Affinity, which was an ASCII BBS using the DLX Software, because it had so much more. It had many various accessible chatrooms, multiple forums like yours, the ability to be invisible, change your colors, everything. Hehehe. After that, going to Yahoo groups which was where Affinity first went, well that was indeed a... shock to say the least.

But I am someone who does change things, and we did indeed change the colors in Windows XP. Not only that, I hunted up another skin for Opera, because I couldn't stand the default there either. I can change the colors in my Yahoo groups, but I don't often, and I barely learned about changing the pictures.

Granted, Affinity didn't have those "kewl" graphics of pictures and photos and stuff, but somehow we never missed it. It was such a cool local community online, that well, it wasn't needed.

We had places to upload and put files and pictures in in those fashions, and download them, so we weren't lacking.

I probably would not have chosen Yahoo to migrate to, when Affinity BBS bit the dust, but our Revered Leader did, and we followed. Now of all those attempts, only mine thrives, (which was sort of a spin-off), and the first one, which limps along now and again.

But I agree wholeheartedly, that Yahoo Groups pales in comparison to here, or many other better places. However, for most people, it's simple, not a lot of effort to use, and if you can cope with the occasional hiccups, pretty stable as a rule.

And I'll be honest, a lot of people, (including me) were AFRAID of the larger sites. When I came to the internet in 2001, I was even afraid of the Yahoo sites, because I had had virtually no internet experience. The most I'd had was Juno email, and not even internet. We didn't even HAVE internet here, we'd relied on the Affinity BBS since 1996, to email one another, talk, chat, post, you name it. But I wanted to maintain my emailing of my (then husband) daily, and so did he, (we write each other every day, ;) ) and so to internet mail we went, and still do it there.

I still consider myself somewhat "green" about the intriciaces of the internet, but I have become quite good at "fishing", i.e. searching the web/net for things. It's things like these sites and the concept of html that well, give me pause, because I still struggle there. But doggedly, I keep trying!

Now actually experimenting with all the knobs and switches provided usually involves the Testing forum, as you already know. But I know that for me, it also involves getting over a certain level of preciousness to actually post to a public place some nonsense for the purposes of trying things out. Heck, I have to do it all the time at work! :-) But then, the very first posts I made to become apart of the community and not just a forum poster were similarly daunting. So.

And oh, I agree. I just feel nervous I guess. I didn't start trying to jump posts to another thread in another section until I was fairly sure I knew how, and EVEN then, as you saw a couple days ago, I fail. I didn't start quoting till I thought I had the gist of it, and I still fail... although the new weecodes work wonders!

Maybe I'll brave the test forum sometime, but honestly, what teaches me more than trying it is simply asking the questions from people, I gained more knowledge about for example, quoting, by my simple question, than by every effort I've ever made to quote in here combined! ;)

Wade, who's hoping he's not seagulling as per Peter's definition.

I don't think this post is seagulling. (I adore seagulls anyway, I have two stuffed ones), I was fascinated and enjoyed your post. :)

Thanks for your input! I'm gonna jump this into tips, because I think that's what it's about. :)

Nightowl >8#

that of facilitating communication between adults, on a variety of topics (hence the separate forums). It even works on Lynx - a text-only reader which can be run from DOS and maybe a few other OSs.

I believe you might be confusing as 'features' - the prettifying stuff of one's chosen reading environment: wallpaper, wrappers er 'skins' and the like.

Oh no, I know the difference. :) By features, I didn't mean anything like that, I meant ASCII, which was a DOS based thing used on most old BBS's (Bulletin Board Systems), and it didn't have anything to do with graphics, only with facilliating communication between adults just like this board.

It was also run from DOS, using Telix or some other terminal program, and was pretty much all text except for ASCII graphics (explained below better, I hope). I first accessed it using a Toshiba 8088 Laptop computer that ran nothing but DOS. :)

The features I meant were things like having multiple chat rooms, (all text), in-board E-mail ability, etc... and I wasn't complaining, I just said I was spoiled to it.

It also used ASCII at times to make "pictures" i.e. build pictures out of the old IBM border characters... (Help me, Orion... I don't know how to explain this!) It wasn't about being pretty whatsoever.

Actually these have not much to do with communication of text, and most-all of the features which Scott has provided here - are about simply, getting the display into a form you prefer, for reading that which you decided might be worth reading. It's fast - partly because of such good planning and because of the expertise of Greg Folkert - who now hosts the whole schmeer, right-shifts and all. And of course - there are NO ADS. That's (just part of) why Things Just Work.

Exactly, and that's why I like Scott's board, it doesn't worry about the "wallpapers" or "pictures" just the cool headings and buttons and things of necessity to facilitate the posting in the forums, etc. Affinity didn't have any ads either, and was as fast as your modem allowed for. I still use a dial-up modem, a external US Robotics V.92. :)

Also, 'dial-up' modems are not a pregnant means for displays of cute graphics and such (which is why - courtesy suggests that - if you plan to include a graphic within a post via [<src-yada>] it's nice to warn in the Title that you have done so, w/ est. size.) Generally "bandwidth eaters" are thus.. mostly unwelcome - and why links are fine, because you have a Choice. (Always there are exceptions, natch - when something just Fits..)

To my knowledge, I have only ever put two pictures in, and that was when I was "proving" myself here. :) I know diddly squat about pictures, and even less about putting the link into the post... although I did learn if I typed out the URL it becomes a link, right?

I'm not sure how you confused my post to have anything to do with graphics, wallpapers, or any other windows type thing, because I was talking mostly about Affinity, I thought, which was the DOS based one. :)

Anyway, hope I clarified it :)

Nightowl >8#

Thank you Orion!!!!!

That was what I didn't know how to say, and John was too tired to explain right now!

Here is another site for a funny partial Star Wars in ASCII mode:

"Big Star Wars fan? Got a few minutes to spare? Try a telnet to
towel.blinkenlights.nl !

Yep, that's how we viewed the computer world before this web thingie
came along!"

Nightowl >8#