The site layout seems to be refined regularly and very well. I do like it. I'm a tad visually challenged and have fiddled with light and dark settings, when logged-in no problems. If I'm not logged-in (not often) I have real trouble reading the text in the "light" mode. Not a big deal for me.

The tools that have been added in the last year or so are great, I strongly suspect that SO's virtual tool&die ideas will continue (with member input) to lead the pack going-away. UGC - you are the power.

Cheers,

Vic

Did someone say... "ANIMATED AVATARS"????

And who is the KING of animated avatars????

<<<<<<<

That's right.....

HAH

(OK Maybe not the King, but definitely a Prince) LOL

Semper

I think JAK is probably the King of the gifs:




Subtle but enthralling. Remember hit flickering candle? How can those be annoying?

OK..

I'm appropriately humbled.. LOL

His animations are truly spectacular...

I am but a Padawan to the Jedi Master...

LOL

Semper

I know this site can be overwhelming, but if you take the time to get to know the site and all its features, I feel certain you will find this to be the most user friendly site on the net.

I belong to other bulletin boards and the only ones that are easier to navigate are the ones that are very small to begin with.

The more complex ones are a nightmare compared to the ATS consortium.

As for the animated avatars, I have to agree that some are more than a little annoying, but if it's that bad, use the ignore button.

I've found that annoying avatars are often put up by annoying people.

Hint: Check out MyATS Favorites. The button is at the top of the page.

[edit on 2007/10/12 by GradyPhilpott]

Childish avatars? Over 100 years Old? How should an avatar look like then? Any examples of any non-childish avatars that doesn't look old? ...oh, and I better add this smiley here, even if it looks a bit childish...



Btw, there are more than one way to create a new thread. And it's not that hard, imo. I can't see how the layout can be better.

Is this button not big enough?

The OP does have a point about the layout being a little bit confusing. When I first got here it was kind of confusing (because it doesn't look like any other board I've been to). To further compound the fact, the site seems to change every time I disappear for a couple of months and come back.

But it's all good though. Being the curious-mind that I am, I look at it and go "Ooh! New layout to explore."

you cant see the button at the top of the page that say's "member center'. Perhaps you need glasses.

Your use of text speak and poor spelling are more annoying to me than the site layout or avatars to be perfectly honest.

If you have any questions try u2u'ing some one for help.

If you check out the freshmans forum there are a heap of people willing to give up their time to help out new members.

Why is it that it seems easier for some to complain rather than ask for help?

mojo

Originally posted by mojo4sale
Why is it that it seems easier for some to complain rather than ask for help?

1. Complaining is a human past time
2. For some people, asking for help may translate as a sign of weakness.

i thought i already posted this but it disappeared so let me try it again,
i think the little dude the OP meant was the 3 amigos and john lears cartoonish (i mean like hand drawn or something, not funny) pictures of themselves on their avatars, if i'm not mistaken.

ah guys, thanks for all the great replies, esspecially the ones showing me how to start a new thread!!!! (think i had got it sussed by then)

i was havin a bit of a bad day, and ye it got to me, but its cool.

what is questionable tho is that all the threads iv started with great facts and useful knowledge get 10 replys if im lucky but if i start a slagging match then ur falling over eachother to get in on the abuse!!!!

a sad scenario!

oh and well dun to 'icybreeze' for being the only 1 to sus out what avatars i was talking about.

and while we'r at it , why do u have to go into a thread to log-in. every other site in the world has a login on the front page. and i dunno about this member centre, theres no link at the top of my page, not on any of the pages.
at least 1 helpful mod put a link in his reply and didnt feel he had to be defensive!!
nuff said!!

Maybe you need a better computer or better computer skills because I never had a difficult time with this site...all I do is read the buttons and they're pretty much self-explanatory.
btw that first reply from dbates had me

[edit on 14-10-2007 by laiguana]

Originally posted by rikmono

what is questionable tho is that all the threads iv started with great facts and useful knowledge get 10 replys if im lucky but if i start a slagging match then ur falling over eachother to get in on the abuse!!!!

a sad scenario!

Certainly is. Hence why my threads rarely get decent responses. Only if I open threads on controversial topics do I get excellent responses.

Doesn't really matter to me though. I'm not after massive replies; I'm after quality replies.

I've tried experimenting with titles... words like KILL and other more sensationalized titles do seem to pull more views.

I'm old, I don't like sensational - I like smart and proof of thesis. Most folks settle for less. Good threads are an absolute treat!

There are folks who do post "good stuff"... sometimes, I almost don't read the titles but rather the OP's name. Quality folks do quality stuff and layout their thread with class and distinction by being authentic.

I've given some thought about whether a site layout could be achieved that would "know" my tastes and standards and "get me what I want". Yeah, it's doable. Some of the financial sites I deal with "know my preferences" as I develop a history with them. I find that encouraging.

Could such stuff work for the ATS membership?

Maybe, but the UGC and lack of rigorous pre-post review by staff would seem to some (other than myself) to allow a lower threshold of quality as time passes. There aren't any checks to keep the quality up so it's run-whatcha-brung, which in many cases is empty calories. It is what it is.

Can users voluntarily improve the post/thread quality without some penalty for "junk"? Not without exclusion. Exclusivity isn't exactly desirable either. Over and over the same "stuff" said by a different person is still the same stuff.

Perhaps after "the revolution" if users have a greater stake and pride in not so much "what" but "how good" the quality of data is then this onslaught of absolutely worthless mindless brain-bilge spew could change.

Remember, remember the 5th of November.

Cheers,

Vic

[edit on 15-10-2007 by V Kaminski]