Talk: Internet forum

From open-encyclopedia.com - the free encyclopedia.

Re: "Notable communities", the main problem with this is that it advertises a few sites at the expense of other notable communities. We could easily get into a situation where everyone thinks their community is "notable" and adds it here. Let's not get on this slippery slope. If one wants to create a "List of Internet forums" (or equivalent) article, create that (and risk VfD), but don't put it here.

Further, the "Notable communties" text blatantly advertises for big-boards.com, which really shouldn't be referred to here as this site doesn't as of yet have encyclopedic relevance.

From What Wikipedia is not, the "Notable communities" text violates #18 of "What Wikipedia entries are not," that is "A vehicle for advertising and self-promotion." -- Stevietheman 14:57, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ah, got it. Thanks for your explanation. -- 67.161.57.4

Article Name

For an article named "Internet forum", it doesn't make sense to me that it focuses on just web-based software. Discussion forums existed on the Internet before the Web, and they will after the Web too. If this article needs expansion, it sure doesn't need a list of obscure web packages. It needs historical context. --Amillar 18:23, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Links to the forum software listed

I noticed that, at some point, someone added a long list of software. How are those in the list chosen? I write forum software (Simple Machines Forum from that list) and I've never even heard of a few of the ones on that list.

You can find a listing of most every internet forum software available here: The Forum Insider Directory

However, that is indeed a long list, and many of those listed are not very popular nor very active. I also noticed, surprisingly, that while software I had never heard of did show on the list, other software such as YaBB (which sees significantly more widespread usage) did not.

If so many are to be added, perhaps a list format more like the PHP page's library list could be used.

-[Unknown] 06:25, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

I concur that the list needs to only include only notable forum products. One way to test notability (beyond looking at facts like widespread usage) is whether they have articles in the Wikipedia. Many of the current red links may not ever have sustained articles for them, due to their lack of notability. I've also noted in my personal talk that I've also never heard of some of these products.

I agree that YaBB should be added to the list, and I don't object to a reformatting that you describe. I also wouldn't mind to see some defense of the entries that are currently listed.

At any rate, after a while, we should remove the links that don't get articles, as if they're notable, they should have an article. -- Stevietheman 16:47, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Looks like Dengar (JeffG?) decided to add a page for YaBB. I also updated it with the tabular format you said you were not against. As they're removed, it can be removed....

As for Simple Machines Forum, I don't believe I could write such a page without being biased... -[Unknown] 01:20, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

Stevietheman, could you tell me which ones you have and have not heard of? Andros 1337 21:26, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What if....?

How would it be if I added links to some of the software currently not on wikipedia? For example:

I didn't do all of them, but that's the idea...

-[Unknown] 07:02, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

No comment? I guess that means no - I know the link style is kinda a no-no. -[Unknown] 02:01, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

Request for expansion?

I could probably make this article longer, but I'd need to know what it should talk about it. I'm "in the field" so to speak, because I do write forum software, but I would be biassed - both on what I think is important for forum software, and etc. I'm more than willing to draft additions to make it longer (or is the request for expansion only for the software listed?) but it would be very helpful to know what subjects or areas are considered lacking (in a less biassed person's opinion.)

-[Unknown] 02:01, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

Searching for Internet Forum Software With Odd(?) Features

I'm wondering if people have seen Internet forum software with any of these (perhaps hairbrained) features:

• Users can edit their posts *after* they've been submitted -- so each post is like a wiki page
• It's possible to manually "rethread" conversations -- if, e.g., it's discovered that two "different" threads are about exactly the same topic
• Users have their "views" of each thread. Thus, for example, she could delete messages that she didn't like from *her* view of the thread without this affecting anyone else. Or, combined with the previous idea, she could rethread the conversation in a way more logical to her, without screwing up anyone else's view.
• Threading needn't be strictly hierarchical. Stuff like this: A) a message can reply not just to one previous message but to a whole collection of previous messages, B) loops in the reply chain -- e.g., message 1 is in reply to message 2 which is in reply to message 3 which is in reply to message 1
• Private (perhaps also public?) annotations of posts

In short, I'm trying to find (or, short of that, design) an ideal combination of Wiki-type environments and Usenet-type environments. Any hints?

--Ryguasu 08:05, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Edit own posts - most forum software allows this. Most forum software these days isn't threaded, I don't know about that second one. Read/unread messages generally replaced number 3.

Again, threading is going out. To address your fourth point, many have simply dropped threading entirely.

The last is often available in many softwares, often as a mod. However, all this you request is generally not very available.

This is not the right place for this sort of discussion, as far as I understand... sorry. I suggest you search google for forums about forum development (which would be much better for this discussion.) If you could please, I would ask that after you've read my message, you remove this from this page - any response can be added to my talk page.

-[Unknown] 23:10, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)

UBB.threads has a threaded display mode, and Infopop's next generation product will have threaded display. vBulletin 3 also has threaded display btw. Andros 1337 02:29, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

While that is true, it's not really used on those systems. Those softwares include it mainly because some people (like this fellow) still want it. And, again, even if you use the threaded mode, it doesn't solve the problems (some of which were mentioned) that exist with it. -[Unknown] 04:18, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)