Forum Upgrade planned - Early Jan 2025 - New Artwork? New Colours? Feedback.

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I'm working on a forum upgrade. Test upgrade was successfully completed, so pencilling in 4th Jan for upgrading the forum.

Questions -

Do we want to keep the existing artwork, or switch to something new?

Any change in preference between light and dark mode?

I will be experimenting with new forum sections this week.

 

[Antonio]

The present artwork is superb. If a replacement is demanded, I vote for something similar, "retro-futuristic looking", produced again from our artist gifted members.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I really like the current artwork.

If we have to replace it, I'd like something of similar quality and awesomeness.

 

[Temistocle]

I really like the actual artwork too. I am a progressive, but conservative for software/interfaces/GUI etc. because always I think "It was better before..." As an example, the "new" and bothersome 10 sites limit of Google search.
BTW, I strongly prefer the light mode.

 

[DWG]

Any change in preference between light and dark mode?

Definitely make it an option, I loathe dark mode with a passion and there are accessibility issues.

 

[BAROBA]

Is it possible to get a Ultrawide banner? Or even a wider forum?
I got one of those crazy wide curved displays ( who hasen't one should really check them out, it is like two displays next to eachother. For the oldschool guys, it is like the Playboy centerfold )
And the plane and the text have room enough next to eachother.
I can't be the only one, right?

PS:I have attached a screenshot.
I do like the dark mode.

 

[Avimimus]

I liked the Mos Eisley Cantina quote..

 

[Lc89]

Clean up the Spacex pages on the NGAD sixth generation fighter. They are now over 200 pages long.

 

[CiTrus90]

I'm strongly in favour of keeping the current artwork.

If I may suggest one thing though, it would be the following: when browsing SPF on my phone (Samsung, Android os and Chrome) I can only change page at the bottom of the thread; is there any way to make it as is on PC, with the option to switch pages in the upper part of the thread as well?

 

[dan_inbox]

I really like the dark mode, and use it almost exclusively when surfing.
Since I mostly surf SPF from a laptop with 1920x1080 resolution, I am always sensitive to screen space. As much as beautiful art is pretty and attractive for a new visitor, it is not very useful for an old hand on his zillionth visit. So if there was an option for a most-streamlined-décor leaving all the space to content proper, it would be very welcome here.

That's for graphics.

Talking about "content proper", this site has a lot of very valuable content that make it the best encyclopaedia for unbuilt project. But it has also a lot of chaff that is the result of humans being behaving like, well, simply humans and too often kids on a "social media" not-so-proper behavior. Rather than like researchers, historians, or simply people writing text worth keeping in an encyclopedia.
There is a regular cleanup by the mods for off-topic, political and obsolete content. It is essential to preserve the signal-to-noise ratio. IMO it should be expanded to purge, or move to a different section, the content that is not "encyclopaedia worth keeping" level.
For ex, the zillion bouts of arguments between Stargazer and Hesham about speculative project without evidence are very useful for maintaining quality, but not so much a worthwhile contribution after the case has been straightened out. The threads could be cleaned up after a while.
Same for all the smart-ass, off-color and profane "wisecracks" and jokes. I'd advocate not necessarily censoring them right away to avoid emotions, but definitely removing them after a few month.

As it is, the signal-to-noise ratio on SPF is one of the best for an internet forum, but is still very far (very very very) away from encyclopaedia level worth-preserving text.
Just imagine finding puns as crass as "AUKUS - Aux culs" unfiltered on Britannica, Larousse or Wikipedia. Simply unthinkable...

Also, compare the consistent quality level of the best posters like (of the top of my head) Justo, Apophenia, PhR and all the other good contributors, versus the inconsistent level of others who regularly spew out crass and lewd "jokes" in the middle of their otherwise valuable contributions. If the crassyest and lewdest lapses were cleaned up after a while, the site level would go up immensely.

IMO this would be a much more important improvement than graphics or color themes.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I believe the current artwork perfectly captures the purpose of this forum, it is just, 'right'.

 

[sublight_]

Paul, did you ever get ipv6 set up? I love dark mode. As far as artwork, it never hurts to try something new. I can crank out a couple prototypes when I get back if you would like.

 

[GTX]

Happy with current...but willing to be convinced otherwise

 

[Hanse]

I'm working on a forum upgrade. Test upgrade was successfully completed, so pencilling in 4th Jan for upgrading the forum.

Questions -

Do we want to keep the existing artwork, or switch to something new?

Any change in preference between light and dark mode?

I will be experimenting with new forum sections this week.

The red one would be sweet but I don't know how well the ratio would work.

 

[Archibald]

I really like the dark mode, and use it almost exclusively when surfing.
Since I mostly surf SPF from a laptop with 1920x1080 resolution, I am always sensitive to screen space. As much as beautiful art is pretty and attractive for a new visitor, it is not very useful for an old hand on his zillionth visit. So if there was an option for a most-streamlined-décor leaving all the space to content proper, it would be very welcome here.

That's for graphics.

Talking about "content proper", this site has a lot of very valuable content that make it the best encyclopaedia for unbuilt project. But it has also a lot of chaff that is the result of humans being behaving like, well, simply humans and too often kids on a "social media" not-so-proper behavior. Rather than like researchers, historians, or simply people writing text worth keeping in an encyclopedia.
There is a regular cleanup by the mods for off-topic, political and obsolete content. It is essential to preserve the signal-to-noise ratio. IMO it should be expanded to purge, or move to a different section, the content that is not "encyclopaedia worth keeping" level.
For ex, the zillion bouts of arguments between Stargazer and Hesham about speculative project without evidence are very useful for maintaining quality, but not so much a worthwhile contribution after the case has been straightened out. The threads could be cleaned up after a while.
Same for all the smart-ass, off-color and profane "wisecracks" and jokes. I'd advocate not necessarily censoring them right away to avoid emotions, but definitely removing them after a few month.

As it is, the signal-to-noise ratio on SPF is one of the best for an internet forum, but is still very far (very very very) away from encyclopaedia level worth-preserving text.
Just imagine finding puns as crass as "AUKUS - Aux culs" unfiltered on Britannica, Larousse or Wikipedia. Simply unthinkable...

Also, compare the consistent quality level of the best posters like (of the top of my head) Justo, Apophenia, PhR and all the other good contributors, versus the inconsistent level of others who regularly spew out crass and lewd "jokes" in the middle of their otherwise valuable contributions. If the crassyest and lewdest lapses were cleaned up after a while, the site level would go up immensely.

IMO this would be a much more important improvement than graphics or color themes.

You must be fun at parties.


There are much more annoying crap that such blatant hypocrisy and political correctness.

One fresh example: @publiusr who is a three decades old troll, unearthing old space threads just to post his crap.

And then @Byeman kicking his a$$ , and the banter between those two going over and over, ruining space threads. THAT's very tiring.

@Byeman however has strong credentials as a space engineer. Long story short: it would be a HUUUGE improvement to the space section if @publiusr was banned - as he has been from NASAspaceflight and countless other space forums. Why moderators tolerate him here is beyond me.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Paul, did you ever get ipv6 set up? I love dark mode. As far as artwork, it never hurts to try something new. I can crank out a couple prototypes when I get back if you would like.

Ipv6 is enabled on current forum, so yes.

 

[Schneiderman]

Light mode is (far) preferable. Not bothered either way on artwork

 

[robunos]

Another vote for Light Mode . . .

cheers,
Robin.

 

[Dreamfighter]

Talking about "content proper", this site has a lot of very valuable content that make it the best encyclopaedia for unbuilt project. But it has also a lot of chaff that is the result of humans being behaving like, well, simply humans and too often kids on a "social media" not-so-proper behavior. Rather than like researchers, historians, or simply people writing text worth keeping in an encyclopedia.
There is a regular cleanup by the mods for off-topic, political and obsolete content. It is essential to preserve the signal-to-noise ratio. IMO it should be expanded to purge, or move to a different section, the content that is not "encyclopaedia worth keeping" level.
For ex, the zillion bouts of arguments between Stargazer and Hesham about speculative project without evidence are very useful for maintaining quality, but not so much a worthwhile contribution after the case has been straightened out. The threads could be cleaned up after a while.
Same for all the smart-ass, off-color and profane "wisecracks" and jokes. I'd advocate not necessarily censoring them right away to avoid emotions, but definitely removing them after a few month.

As it is, the signal-to-noise ratio on SPF is one of the best for an internet forum, but is still very far (very very very) away from encyclopaedia level worth-preserving text.

I too very much appreciate the huge amount of high valuable aviation content which can be found on this site, it is the main reason I joined this site 16 years ago and I only rarely visit other aviation related forums.
And I completely agree the high quality level of (content of) this site should be guarded carefully.

But as far as I am aware, I am now writing some text on "Secret Projects Forum', not on 'Secret Projects Encyclopedia'.
Besides reading and looking at very high quality content , I 'occasionally' also like to crack a joke.

Btw, a relatively long time ago, the everlasting seriousness and complete inability of about 95% of my fellow students to laugh or even smile for a split second was the main reason I quit engineering studies and switched to different studies. A choice which became - together with loosing almost all my beloved aerospace related books & files about 20 years ago - most probably the main reason I personally only very rarely (or perhaps never) contribute any 'high valuable content' to this site.

 

[aim9xray]

My votes (for Paul):
- White mode (dark optional)
- Existing art
My votes (for users):
- Less dupli-posting
- Less kvetching
- More content

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I quit engineering studies and switched to different studies. A choice which became - together with loosing almost all my beloved aerospace related books & files about 20 years ago - most probably the main reason I personally only very rarely (or perhaps never) contribute any 'high valuable content' to this site.

Same for me, but I managed to rebuy what I disposed of and much more.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I think it's up to @galgot if he wants to provide a different image of the Boeing 2707.

 

[martinbayer]

I'm working on a forum upgrade. Test upgrade was successfully completed, so pencilling in 4th Jan for upgrading the forum.

Questions -

Do we want to keep the existing artwork, or switch to something new?

Any change in preference between light and dark mode?

I will be experimenting with new forum sections this week.

I like the current artwork - unless I'm shown more mindblowingly dazzling alternatives, I vote for keep as is. My standard answer for any question asking me to choose between the light and the dark side is keeping it light. I firmly believe in enlightenment, both literally and figuratively, so why even consider to go back to the early soylent green on black backgrounds??? I really start to feel like this is the setup to a Twilight Show episode - I fancy myself as a blunt political progressive, but I am surprisingly amused that in this case I am a staunch cultural conservative...

 

[Scott Kenny]

Oh, right.

I prefer dark mode, I'm usually online after the sun goes down locally, and Dark Mode helps reduce blue light impact (plus my computer shifts screen backlight to be a much warmer color overall).

Honestly, if we can easily keep both modes, that has my vote.

 

[jeffb]

It's all good, and the current background is fine. A refresh might be nice though, just as long as you keep the "light-mode" please.

Is it a lot of work to change the background image? If not, it might be nice to have a small set of backgrounds on automated rotation? No?

 

[Antonio]

"Secret Projects Forum', not on 'Secret Projects Encyclopedia'

That's an interesting point to me. We could think about it as a museum with a good bar.
However never forget that "Secret Projects" value is in the enciclopedia.

 

[Antonio]

Following this "Enciclopedia and forum" perceived dual nature, what about this structural variation with the current sections?

SPF enciclopedia
Projects and prototypes
Research
Related books and products


SPF forum
General Aviation, Naval and Military discussions
Speculation

 

[dan_inbox]

I completely agree the high quality level of (content of) this site should be guarded carefully.

But as far as I am aware, I am now writing some text on "Secret Projects Forum', not on 'Secret Projects Encyclopedia'.

Salmson-Béchereau SB-3 side

However never forget that "Secret Projects" value is in the enciclopedia.

I agree in spades with Antonio.
And, fortunately, it doesn't have to be exclusively one or the other.
It already happens that some moderators regularly perform "clean up" (their own term) on older text in threads.

I would advocate that we let forumers write the way they do today, ie some excellent text and some less so, some with real knowledge value and some not (questions, jokes, rants, profanity, etc).

The threads which have "enough" knowledge value could be cleaned up of their chaff after a while (say 3 months or whatever), to be elevated as much as possible to Enyclopedia value. Then they can stay forever (or be moved) to the section "Secret (Unbuilt) Projects".

The threads without enough knowledge value should be moved to the Discussion and Speculation area (out of which Site Feedback should be moved elsewhere).
And those threads really devoid of knowledge value could go into the bar, or to some bit trash for the worse ones. That is, _IF_ Paul wishes to spend resources hosting such an archive. (Me, I wouldn't store crass jokes and profanity, but that's just me not being "fun at parties" when I'm on a knowledge site rather than at a party).

To make the long story short, let life on a forum happen, then skim the valuable knowledge to the encyclopedia section. Try to preserve the best of both worlds.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Interesting idea, I will think about it.

Here's a new feature iin Xenforo 2.3 - live match suggestions in search as you type your query.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

There are not too many user-facing changes in 2.3, but version 2.4 will be released in 2025 with more improvements and then 3.0 will be a major upgrade.

 

[Schneiderman]

In the parts of the Forum I frequent there have, indeed, been a good number of informative posts providing 'new' information of valuable insight over the years. However a good deal remains vague opinions, 'I-read-somewhere-but-forget-where', and 2+2=5. I keep a mental list of members whose post I perceive as valuable and those that are background noise. So, while there are aspects of encyclopaedia for sure, it is still very much a forum and I don't really see how it can be edited/moderated to change that

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

My original intent was a Wiki section of articles distilled from the topics, but it is just too much work to create and maintain without dedicated paid staff.

 

[hesham]

I'm working on a forum upgrade. Test upgrade was successfully completed, so pencilling in 4th Jan for upgrading the forum.

Questions -

Do we want to keep the existing artwork, or switch to something new?

Any change in preference between light and dark mode?

I will be experimenting with new forum sections this week.

Congratulations my dear PaulMM,and for questions,

- Please keep the existing artwork,and arrangements of sections

- Please keep preference between light and dark,it's our famous trade mark

 

[fightingirish]

Dear @overscan (PaulMM),
dear mods and members,
thanks for the questions.
over the year 2024 I really got used to the SPF Dark 2.0 theme on all platforms and browsers.
So, like @hesham, please keep it that way.
I also really like the current artwork, so IMHO there no need to change it.
Looking forward to 2025 with the live search suggestions.

 

[galgot]

Hi, was pointed here by @sferrin.
Sure, if you guys aren't tired of SSTs by now and want another one, I can check what I have in store to put up there .
Is it possible to have a different banner for light and dark mode ?

 

[CJGibson]

Same as last time: is there some way to add 'not user name' to a search. There must be some way of searching that doesn't spit out every post by a user whose name is the same as, or includes, the project/type you are searching.

Chris

 

[TomcatViP]

In the search function, instead of having to review one after the other every related thread:
- open a new windows into a concatenated results thread were all the user selected thread are merged into a single one, arranged either by:
- date
- key words occurence
- suggested results

So far SPF has been a single windows browsing website. So I don't know if that would violate any rule you have setup.
The concatenated result thread would also be ideally something user could save as a doc or pdf file (depending on your copyright policy). I would not be shocked to see watermark on each pages. (Do not undervalue this forum achievements).

 

[scautomoton]

I also use dark mode exclusively, and I also like the artwork as is. I feel like any upgrades which improve core functionality would be preferable; things like the live search mentioned, the ability to hide threads which constantly clog up the "latest" feed which I have zero interest in, anything which makes the interface more slick and user friendly

 

[quellish]

Following this "Enciclopedia and forum" perceived dual nature, what about this structural variation with the current sections?

A forum really doesn't work well as an encyclopedia. Take, for example, a thread like the ISINGLASS thread. As knowledge of the project evolved over time the thread evolved and documented the changing knowledge of the program. To learn about ISINGLASS as we understand it now you really have to read the whole thread and the reader may come to an understanding that is actually different than what is represented in the thread.

To be an encyclopedia threads would have to be distilled into basically articles (or summaries of facts) and kept updated. That would be quite a project.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Hi, was pointed here by @sferrin.
Sure, if you guys aren't tired of SSTs by now and want another one, I can check what I have in store to put up there .
Is it possible to have a different banner for light and dark mode ?

It is, if I keep the two separate themes. With 2.3 it's possible to make one theme with light and dark colours.