# Concise Versus Gangly, When It Comes To Forum Type Things?



## YayGollum (May 2, 2007)

What we have now, in case you need to see it. ---> 

News, Announcements, And Site Management Discussions

News From Bree

Discussions About News From Bree

Entmoot

Member News And Announcements

New Members

Member Announcements

Member Web Sites

The Works Of J. R. R. Tolkien

"The Hobbit"

The Hobbit Reading Project

"The Lord Of The Rings"

The Lord Of The Rings Reading Project

"The Silmarillion"

The Silmarillion Reading Project

"The History Of Middle Earth

"Other Works By J. R. R. Tolkien"

The Halls Of Tolkienology

The Hall Of Fire

Bag End

The Glittering Caves

T. T. F. Debating Society

Debates

Judging

Annals Of The Eldanyare

The Languages Of Middle Earth

The Library Of The Istari

Essays And Lectures

Character Profiles

Research, Reference, Bibliographies

J. R. R. Tolkien: The Creator Of Middle Earth

Related Subjects

New Line Cinema's 'L. O. T. R.' ... And Beyond

"The Fellowship Of The Ring"

"The Two Towers"

"The Return Of The King"

Tolkien's Versus Jackson's 'L. O. T. R.'

New Line Cinema's "The Hobbit"

Other Related Topics

Middle Earth R. P. G. (Role-Playing Games)

Council Of The Wise

War Of The Jewels O. O. C.

From Erebor To Eldamar

War Of The Jewels I. C.

Strolls Through The Green Hill Country

Glory Of Days Past 

Bars And Inns

The Green Dragon

C. S. Lewis

Star Wars

The Ivy Bush

The Golden Perch

The Back Room

The Prancing Pony

The Forsaken Inn

The Floating Log

Mathom House

Archives

And All Of The Little Subsections That I Didn't Wish To Type Out

______________________________________________________________

That's a lot. Dang. My poor paws hurt from typing all of that. My proposal --->

News, Announcements, And Site Management Discussions

News From Bree - Combined with Discussions About News From Bree, since, Why not? Combined with the Member News And Announcements, since it's all the same stuff to myself, and none of these sections are especially crowded with activity, anyways

Entmoot

The Works Of J. R. R. Tolkien can stay the same, I guess, even though I'd just want one big section for book stuff. Also, get rid of the Reading Projects. They never went as well as it would have been great for them to have went. They are depressing to notice. 

The Halls Of Tolkienology

Combine The Hall Of Fire and Bag End (Why not?)

The Glittering Caves

T. T. F. Debating Society - Get rid of the subsections, though. Can't a thread title keep things organized enough, anyways?

Combine Annals Of The Eldanyare and The Library Of The Istari (Why not?)

Delete the Languages Of Middle Earth (Too depressing, as well. Anything that would have gone here can also go elsewhere)

J. R. R. Tolkien: Creator Of Middle Earth

Related Subjects (Keep this the same, but combine the subsections, since I don't see why they'd warrant the separation)

Middle Earth R. P. G. (Role-Playing Games) - Keep it the same but get rid of the subsections. Maybe archive them? But then, they didn't really get very far.

Bars And Inns - Just combine the The Ivy Bush, The Golden Perch, The Forsaken Inn, and The Floating Log sections. (Why not?)

______________________________________________________________

There you go. Much shorter. Lots more achingly beautiful. Make your own version, praise mine, or rant about the thought of anything changing.


----------



## Seregon (May 2, 2007)

Change is bad. Very bad. I like things just the way they are.


----------



## Bethelarien (May 2, 2007)

I think things are quite logical the way they are. I like them.

Change is bad.


----------



## YayGollum (May 2, 2007)

Do what? But what about all of my excellent points? You'd have to agree that deleting a few things makes sense, yes? Mayhaps you merely aren't concerned with a few of the sections? They are easily ignored and my tragic depression is silly?


----------



## Noldor_returned (May 3, 2007)

*Moved sections*

I was just looking for the Hall of Fire and Bag End, and it took me a while after I found the section missing to locate them. I then found them in Halls of Tolkienology. Why were they moved and is it permanent?


----------



## Ingwë (May 3, 2007)

*Re: Moved sections*



YayGollum said:


> I never was a large fan of guildses, even though I made my own.  Any discussion that I saw going on in one of them looked like something that could have gone in a common area. Sure, guilds are usually open for everyone (no evil age-specific guilds!), but they'd obtain their regulars and humans would build up little mini-forums and look down on those who weren't a part of their guild. I avoided posting in such places but loved the material to come out of some of them, so mayhaps the baragund person knows what he's writing about when it comes to bite-sized sections? But then, the lack of activity does seem to be a good reason for not making all kinds of new sections. A suggestion (one that I have made before) --->
> 
> News, Announcements, New Members (it's all the same to me, as well as, are any of those sections especially active enough to warrant whole sections?)
> Member Web Sites (if you must)
> ...


 
This is Yay's post from the Guilds thread. He is right. We have too many sections. To me it looks better now. The Hall of Fire and Bag End fit The Halls of Tolkienology. This is the description of the section:



> The Halls of Tolkienology
> These fora are for general discussions and deliberations encompassing a wide range of topics related to Tolkien's collective body of work.


I do think it is permanent. Nice job, Ithy 



EDIT: I replied to Noldor's thread...


----------



## Majimaune (May 3, 2007)

*Re: Moved sections*

Yeah I couldnt find it for ages either. Was about to search for it when I saw Bag End and Hall Of Fire in Halls of Tolkienology. Gees we should have some sort of announcement before something happens.


----------



## Noldor_returned (May 3, 2007)

Everyone was used to the old format. I vote for back to how it was.


----------



## Ithrynluin (May 3, 2007)

Noldor_returned said:


> I was just looking for the Hall of Fire and Bag End, and it took me a while after I found the section missing to locate them. I then found them in Halls of Tolkienology. Why were they moved and is it permanent?



Those were moved as part of an effort to reduce redundant forums, so that they are not spread too thin. I decided to stick with the name "Halls of Tolkienology" rather than "General Discussions..." because it is a) less generic b) harks back to the old days of the guilds and whatnot that many of us are fond of.

About Yay's changes, I think they may be just a bit too radical, though I think a few additional changes could be made, such as removing the News from Bree forum or joining the Forsaken Inn and Ivy bush with the Floating Log.


----------



## Ingwë (May 3, 2007)

I consider that change a minor one  though HoT section look kinda big now. 
But it is true that ppl hardly accept any changed, good ones or bad ones.


----------



## Maeglin (May 3, 2007)

I agree with Yay. There were way too many forums to look at, many of them redundant. Not to mention that when I come on here a couple times every day and scroll all the way down, there is only ever a new post in about 2 or 3 out of the 50 gajillion forums, so it is depressing to look at.


----------



## Seregon (May 3, 2007)

Well, it's true that it would be more apealling to have just a few sections and every day see at least one new post in each of them. But doesn't that kinda seem like a tactic to make us ignore the fact that there aren't many people on anymore? Like, we're fooling ourselves into thinking something that isn't true?


----------



## Ithrynluin (May 3, 2007)

You make an excellent point, Seregon. Doing that wouldn't actually solve anything, and it would make things far more messy. At least now you know where to look for a thread on elven languages and where for one on comparing Middle-earth with Greek mythology.


----------



## baragund (May 3, 2007)

I like Yay's idea. Some of the sections are repeatively, redundantly duplicative.


----------



## YayGollum (May 3, 2007)

Well, to all who agreed with me, you are cool. Go us! We understand that concise is better than gangly, when it comes to forum type things. Sure, I guess that we wouldn't have to go with all of my changes. I have the ability to compromise. I don't understand what the large deal is with keeping things the same. How difficult is it to do a bit of a search for threads you're looking for? I do it all the time. And, sure, making twenty-seven thousand sections for each of the categories of topics that we can come up with does make things easy to find, but I am merely one of a minority that sees the glaring lack of activity as depressing? My suggestions haven't been made to fool anyone. Name someone more honest than myself. Very difficult, yes? I merely see sections that have little use (Sure, there could still be a little, for the two or three who enjoy the section and come to visit once every two months) and could easily as well as sensibly be combined with other sections.


----------



## Majimaune (May 4, 2007)

I think if you want to remove something then remove Glory Of Past Days in the RPG section. It has no posts in it and I reckon never will. That would clear some stuff up if thats what is wanted.


----------



## Ithrynluin (May 4, 2007)

The Glory of Days Past is not meant to have any posts within it, as it is not a forum, but a link to the MERPG archives. However, I reckon that could be placed within the description of the MERPG forums.

Edit: The link isn't working, so I'll definitely remove it for the time being.


----------



## Bethelarien (May 5, 2007)

May I just say that I _really_ don't like the new arrangement? I'm all discombobulated. Why do we have to mess with a good thing? Grrr...


----------



## Ithrynluin (May 5, 2007)

I'm trying to balance having organized forums with the 'being spread out too thin' argument, so I removed/merged anything that was redundant, and left the things that serve a unique purpose. I don't think it should be too difficult to get used to this compromise.


----------



## Eledhwen (May 5, 2007)

On the basis that it takes me twice as long to shop after my local supermarket has re-arranged its shelves, I would like things to remain as they are. I'm the sort of person whose filing follows an archeological format: that the deeper down the pile of papers you go, the older the files. Simple. I'm sure Bilbo would have approved.


----------



## Majimaune (May 5, 2007)

So now instead of having five (or whatever it was) thingies in the Bars and Inns section we now only have three. Stop confusing me people. PLEASE!!!

Also I liked it the old way.


----------



## Chymaera (May 5, 2007)

My opinion shouldn't count for much.

The membership and post activity is not what it was from the peck times. 

Moving through the Forum now feels a bit like Earendil wandering the streets of Tirion on Tuna.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 5, 2007)

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It ain't broke.

Barley


----------



## YayGollum (May 5, 2007)

Argh! How annoyed would you guys have been if they made all of the changes that I wanted? Pretty achingly, I would guess. But how was it not broke, as this Barliman Butterbur person puts it? It had all of these useless parts sticking out. And not even useless like tassels on the handles of a bicycle, useless like extra fingers that get in the way of all of the things commonly made for people with only five digits per hand. No offense intended towards people who loved things the way they were or towards anyone with more than five digits per hand. Some sections that were especially similar have been combined, but none of the information has been lost. What's the problem? Things are still easily found. If the way that you normally used to find your threads is gone, use another way. I muchly enjoy the search function. Why don't others?


----------



## Majimaune (May 6, 2007)

YayGollum said:


> But how was it not broke, as this Barliman Butterbur person puts it? It had all of these useless parts sticking out. And not even useless like tassels on the handles of a bicycle, useless like extra fingers that get in the way of all of the things commonly made for people with only five digits per hand.


Some might have been useless but they were useless in a good way. This is the first major change to the forum since I joined (and possibly the only change) and I probably will get used to it being like this but personally I liked it the way it was.


----------



## Ingwë (May 6, 2007)

It look strange to me... 
It was the old way for about 3 years for me and now it is a bit strange. I do think merging all member announcements sections is good, there was only one active - Member Announcements . I have always liked the News and Discussion of the News sections and now they're merged  but maybe it is better. The Halls of Tolkienology section looks too big but all sub-sections fit it good. As for Bars and Inns section, I don't visit it often and I like it nowadays 
About the MERPG link. As far as remember there was a thread with the link, is it the link that doesn't work?


----------



## Ermundo (May 7, 2007)

This new layout is weird. Nough said.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 8, 2007)

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It ain't broke.

Barley


----------



## Majimaune (May 9, 2007)

Barley again says the greatest line...


----------



## YayGollum (May 10, 2007)

Which means that your answer to my question, Barliman Butterbur person, was ---> Uh, because I wrote so, of course?


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 11, 2007)

YayGollum said:


> Which means that your answer to my question, Barliman Butterbur person, was ---> Uh, because I wrote so, of course?



Uhhhhhhh... huh?

Barley


----------



## Majimaune (May 11, 2007)

YayGollum said:


> Which means that your answer to my question, Barliman Butterbur person, was ---> Uh, because I wrote so, of course?





Barliman Butterbur said:


> Uhhhhhhh... huh?
> 
> Barley


I don't don't know what you mean Yay. I mean it wasnt broke. It was just a bit overcrowded but it was the overcrowded parts that some *cough* (alot) liked.


----------



## YayGollum (May 11, 2007)

My question ---> "But how was it not broke, as this Barliman Butterbur person puts it?" Mayhaps I should have merely worded that to look way more like a question that I actually wanted an answer to. oh well. My explanation for why I figure it was broke ---> "It had all of these useless parts sticking out. And not even useless like tassels on the handles of a bicycle, useless like extra fingers that get in the way of all of the things commonly made for people with only five digits per hand. No offense intended towards people who loved things the way they were or towards anyone with more than five digits per hand. Some sections that were especially similar have been combined, but none of the information has been lost."

And anyways, Majimaune person, I would call the place spread too thing before I'd call the place overcrowded. Sure, overcrowded with too many largely useless (yet sure, familiar, which isn't a good reason to keep anything around, in my opinion) parts, but spread too thin just seems like an achingly tragic thing to see. What was gotten rid of that so many enjoyed? A few sections were moved around, and a few were merged. Nothing was lost, right?


----------



## Majimaune (May 11, 2007)

Yeah well now I am kinda used to the new layout, it was just at first that I was like "Where is everything? Whats happening?" you know that sort of thing. I think the best part of the change was getting rid of those couple of bars and inns that were used about this *does a little thing with fingers* much.


----------

