Another problem - probably a glitch at the moment - is that when you try to look back at previous threads on the recent posts forum homepage you get taken to the 'default' forum homepage, meaning that the only way to look back is to look through the individual forums - can this be fixed please.

Blimey, as usual, I'm confused. So can someone tell me what all the fuss is about? Those who devised and instigated the site felt that important threads were getting lost, so they did something about it. As the site owners, they have every right to make changes where they see fit (someone has to be in charge here), but for those who don't like the change, all that's required is one extra mouse click. Is that such a big deal?

I've read talk of censorship. Come on, where? When? I've certainly not seen it. And this talk about 'us sub payers' having rights. Well I'm not sure how many rights well under a quid a week should buy us, but I do know that the site founders do an excellent (and difficult) job overall, and we should maybe be a little bit grateful that they give as much of their time as they do.

So there's been a change that requires just one mouse click to rectify. forgive me for repeating, is that such a big deal?

Sorry, but I have to agree with Roger here. One mouse click and everything is back to normal...I think this is fine.

Seems ok to me.

I've only got one problem with this site, and it's very small and probably due to me having a rubbish connection.

On a 56k cheapo bog-standard modem, why does each page take forever to load?

It can't all be down to my connection as other sites load quickly. It makes browsing the site really tedious - even just another click takes about fifteen seconds to load. One solution is for me to shell out for broadband, I was just wondering if there was another way, or if anyone else has the same problem.

Colin M.
(oh, and the profile pages being registered on Google - but that's a matter for another day)

Colin - there is an issue at the moment with speed which I'm looking into. It seems to be intermittent, so sometimes when a page takes a long time you can just refresh the page and it comes in fast.

It seems fairly constant. The top of the page info all appears instantly, but everything below that line, (below the pink tags - home, writer's archive etc) takes another fifteen seconds to come up.

I can live with it for now, I was just wondering if anyone else had the same problem.

Colin M

I'd like the most active threads to take precedence. It is also more interesting to see which threads capture the interest of other members and illicit the most responses.

I don't think that this is something that should be left to the discretion of the people who run the forums rather than the people who frequent it.

This is just my opinion, everyone seems to have their own take on what is best.

There are obviously a lot of members who feel this change to the Forums is either a good idea, or that it is not really such a big deal...fine. I have no issue with anyone else over this, if it doesn't float your boat, then that's great.
All I am doing is to state my personal opinion, and I would ask for the right for me to have that, and to articulate that, to be accepted. I am sorry if it spoils your creative atmosphere...hey, life spoils mine, but what can you do?
For me, this issue goes beyond the small technical change that has been made, and into ground that I feel is very wrong. Can't help it, I don't want to come on here and get irritated either, but I'm afraid I am.
WW is a commercial set up. We pay to be on here. It's not a charity and I will NOT subscribe to the idea that we should all just be very grateful they let us on and never raise our voices. Presumably the folk that run it break even, make a little money or will soon hope to do so. They provide a service which I pay for. Many aspects of that service run well and I salute them, but I reserve the right to show concern when I feel they make wrong decisions. As a person who pays - and I pay what they ask, so if it's not enough then they need to ask for more, simple - I believe that gives me the right to have a small say in what happens here.

I simply don't like the way in which some things are now deemed interesting and important, without any consultation or agreeing of frameworks to decide this. Under the previous set up, if threads were read a lot, added to a lot, they stayed on the main page. If they weren't they floated off into oblivion. Now that seems to me to be the perfect, 'democratic' (tsk!) way for any decision about importance or interest to be made. Things are important because we, this active community of writers, deems them so. Fair enough? Well, I think so.
For me, coupled with a similar discussion some of us had here a few weeks ago, this idea that it will now be decided for us which threads are important, is simply unacceptable.
If you find it doesn't bother you, then that's really great. I wish it didn't bother me. But it does.

x
tc

Colin, I have broadband, and often have the same problem. As David says it seems to be intermittent. And I totally agree with Roger. Someone has to steer the ship, and it's best if that job's done by the captain. We don't want to hit the rocks.

TC,

I agree with you. The site experts should definitely listen to us and both sides of the argument. This thread started off against the change, then a few people said they liked it/ didn't mind it. It's good that there are exponents for and against and (hopefully) the experts who run this site will take this balanced view into account and make changes if suitable.

In this friendly spirit I would like to argue for it. I do think that sometimes interesting topics fall off the page far too quickly. Sometimes I can't check this site for a few days due to work, travelling, etc and when I get back it would be good to know that I haven't missed topics I find interesting. This seems to be a way of making sure that this is minimised. If the click to recent topics didn't exist I'd have a problem with it, but I think this is an extra feature, rather than something that takes away from the site. However, if the majority of people are against it, I would not like to see the feature deleted. Instead maybe the situation could be reversed whereby the link which currently leads to 'Recent Posts' could be changed to lead to 'Selected Topics'. I'd be happy with that arrangement too.

I do agree that the criteria of what is put on that page should be discussed however. Hopefully they look at topics that are v popular, or ones that give good information i.e. a competition, that won't necessarily be answered by subscribers but is useful to know.

As Nell is fond of saying however, I hope these pixels don't go frantic and make this into a stand off and please everyone who disagrees, please still like me!

James (Anthony)

<Added>

Having just read Katie's comment, would agree with that too. These things have to come in first in order to get the reaction. I don't know how many members there are, but I reckon quite a few. Therefore I think the bile at the beginning of this thread it s little harsh.

But I also think that threads that discuss these matters once implemented must be taken into account, hence I think the ongoing discussion.

But as I maybe about to get cruxified, I might as well get stoned as well

For my tuppence worth, I think the WW team are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

In it's previous form, yes, popular topics remained at the top, but discussions were often swamped by 'introduce your work' posts, and shuffled off into oblivion. I've found lately that the forum seemed to be less active, but this could just be because I lost a lot of threads amidst the new work. Now, I'm all for the new work, but it's a clear indication that this site is getting bigger by the day, and David and co. have a lot to manage.

Equally, I can understand if some people feel 'censored' but somehow I doubt there are darker forces at work. And with one click you can go back to the old version in any case.

As for consultation,it seems to be a simple case of practicality. It is not practical for David to consult the entire list of members everytime he wants to make a change to the site. The services each member pays for are still available to all.

But it's clear that some people take this sort of change more personally than others, and I'm afraid I have little idea of how to overcome that - you can't please everyone....

Katie

James ( as I was the first to respond I presume you are having ago at me I take no offence but,

it wasn't bile it was my view having read the reasons for the change I made a rasoned view, my view and I expressed it, also it seems to be a view shared by some others.

If the major reason for changing the format was as Katie/Elspeth has hinted at because of the large numbers of introduce your work posts

then perhaps the answer is to cure the problem and not the symptom

stop the introduce your work posts appearing on the main forums and have a seperate listing or, dare I suggest, do away with that particular forum altogether.

There is space already allocated for some info on the item post inital page and you can also add a comment when you first post a new piece of work. Thus the introduce your work forum seems a bit overkill to me.

that is my opinion

david

I'd like to think that this is a site where we can all voice our opinions, but I believe the trouble starts when the initial reaction to action taken by the WW team is too strong. If we can all keep calm and state our personal points of view quietly and succinctly then things won't go critical, as they seem to have been doing lately. This applies right across the board, with comments too, and reactions to comments and posts. The quiet voice is sometimes the most effective. I'll stop now, work to do...

To those that demand a say in how the site is set up, do you also demand that Tesco arrange their shelves in a way that suits you, or do you quietly allow their millions spent in market research to set that up for you, including the most useful things the furthest from you, and regular reshuffles to make you have to go looking for your regularly purchased products?

We don't complain about this because the actual contents of the shelves remains largely unchanged, and the bottom line is that everything you want is still there. Therefore, we still go in week in week out and spend our money buying the same things, we just have to occasionally pick it up from a different shelf.

I really don't see why a minor change in presentation can kick up so much fuss. It looks to me that the change now highlights notices posted by the site experts, allowing me to more quickly update myself on any inside industry knowledge that the experts have chosen to share.

If I then want to chat away and make angry comments at people, as is my typical want, that facility is a mere click away.

Further, for those who seem purple-faced at having to make that extra click, might I point out to you the Favourites tab on your browser, to which you can add the forum page of your choice, and henceforth navigate to it without having to endure any more of those time-consuming clicks.

A little perspective people, please. The end is not quite nigh, and I, for one, applaud the continuing efforts from the WW team to improve on the site, including the forums, which are available to all users - and here is my final point - paying or otherwise. That's right. Non-paying members use the forums too, and they are not the sole play-thing of those so willing to jump on their soapbox having paid the almighty and magnanimous membership fee that seems to make you a better person.

<Added>

Can I also point out that, as a paying member of the site, I put forth the money to become a full-member so as to support the growth of a new and exciting community, not to dictate how it evolved.