| Author |
Message |
    
Sifo
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2015 - 07:48 pm: | 
|
But if the cost is the same monthly then why not have the features/benefits to make the easier to use and access?
Well you will have certain costs (at least in terms of peoples time) to make the conversion, and learn to maintain the new board. That becomes very real when you are the one it falls upon. There will also be the cost of the loss of legacy information/features. I couldn't tell you what those loses would be without doing a real analysis of the situation. Again, there is a real cost involved in that analysis. Sure, I would like to see something better, but I'm not the one who has to bear the costs involved. I respect an informed decision from those involved in the cost/benefit analysis. The simple reality is that the current software, archaic as it may be, does a respectable job meeting the real needs. How much is really gained with even the best software? At what real costs?
I've had indexing problems on data bases from IBM, Oracle, MS and others. The recent problem isn't very unique. |
Sifo
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2015 - 07:52 pm: |
|
I will say that I was a member of a Vbulletin board that had some features that I really did like. Thread management was the best I've seen IMO. It's not my decision though. |
Greg_e
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2015 - 08:09 pm: |
|
I'll say again since cost came up... Joomla for free front end, Kunena for free forum that plugs into Joomla. Runs on mysql or mariadb which are again free and often found as part of a Linux OS (also free). Now it's down to cost of hardware and data transfer, and probably cost of database migration. This software might be so old that there weren't any conversion filters when I searched. That means probably going through a CSV export by hand. That would indeed be lots of work!
I know a little about Joomla and Kunena and would be glad to help out, but my knowledge might be too limited right now to make a real impact in the database migration. |
Airbozo
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2015 - 08:20 pm: |
|
"It is good, as there have been a lot of folks acquiring used Buells as they become silly cheap, and Badweb serves as pretty much the only, in concert with American Sport Bike, source of reliable information."
XLForum.net has a section for Buells and several owners help with questions and suggestions and we often send folks here to find what they need. Information on engines and drive trains is second to only BadWB given that they are similar to the sportsters. Several members here are also members on xlforums.
Vbulletin is a nice package that is so customizable, you could make it look like badweb if you wanted to. IT does cost though. Not too bad, but not something Bert should be paying out of pocket.
I do get frustrated by the quoting issues and image uploads, but I have done this sort of thing for a long time and /IMG is second nature.
Searching and PM's seem all but useless and if I need to find something I use google and it usually points me here anyway. |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 08:31 am: |
|
Quoting a whole post is easy if you can click a button to do so, but we want better than that. Quote the relevant part of the post you want to quote.
So I would say the "one button" approach is a worse approach, in that it encourages lower quality posts. |
Froggy
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 11:35 am: |
|
I forgot to mention in my last post about features, wiki posts freaking rock. They can be edited by any member (or select members). They are fantastic for things where many people contribute. Something as simple as a list of who is attending an event can add themselves to the list rather than flood the thread with "me toos". Also for things like parts cross references, if CarPartStore now sells Doohikies that fit, someone can go and add a link to the list.
The BRAN would be a perfect candidate to Wiki, people can add/remove themselves, update phone numbers, etc. Sometimes things change, and old information no longer applies (discontinued/updated parts, new software, etc), it can be updated easily by someone other than a moderator or original poster.
quote:Quoting a whole post is easy if you can click a button to do so, but we want better than that. Quote the relevant part of the post you want to quote.
So I would say the "one button" approach is a worse approach, in that it encourages lower quality posts.
The beauty of modern forum software, you can highlight what you want, press the quote button, and instantly only quote that section! Also nice is that it can link back to the original comment, which is great if something is on a different page or thread. |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 12:15 pm: |
|
I think a parallel wiki that goes alongside BadWeb would be an exceptionally useful and valuable thing. Particularly for the knowledge vault. |
Hybridmomentspass
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 03:23 pm: |
|
". Quote the relevant part of the post you want to quote.
So I would say the "one button" approach is a worse approach, in that it encourages lower quality posts."
Or just delete the parts that you dont deem relevant. Its not that hard really.
Much easier than knowing some code to type before or after you copy and paste the parts |
Froggy
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 03:49 pm: |
|
quote:Much easier than knowing some code to type before or after you copy and paste the parts
And non-standard code on top of it.
quote:I think a parallel wiki that goes alongside BadWeb would be an exceptionally useful and valuable thing. Particularly for the knowledge vault.
I thought about that, even started to make one, but no, it would not be as good or useful as an inline wiki post. You would be dealing with additional database, username/passwords, easier to target by spambots, etc.
An example of threads with a wiki post:
http://slickdeals.net/f/1840515-swagbucks-special- offers-thread-ot-welcome?v=1
http://slickdeals.net/f/5276432-freedompop-friends |
|
