Community Poll: How would YOU organize our forums?
TappedOut forum
Posted on May 25, 2015, 10:29 a.m. by Epochalyptik
We're discussing how our forums—particularly our format forums—might best be organized. We're looking for a layout that's user friendly and logically grouped.
Here's the list of our current forums:
Site Updates
Deck Help
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation
Economics
Lore
Standard
Modern
Legacy
Commander
Limited
Pauper
The Kitchen Table
Online Magic
TappedOut
Social
Gear
General
The Trading Post
Challenges and Articles
Custom Cards
The Blind Eternities
Here are some questions to guide the discussion:
- Do you think we can group these thematically or categorically?
- Do forums need to be added?
- How do you use the forums?
- What sort of visual layout would be most helpful to you?
One. Organisation.
I suggest groupings similar to this:
Deck Help
Site Updates
Site Help (the TappedOut forum)
Singleton
Commander
Tiny Leaders
Other
Non-Singleton
Standard
Modern
Legacy
Vintage
Other
Limited
Sealed
Cube
Draft
Other
Gear
Spoilers
Lore
Blind Eternities
Potential problems with this method: Unsure whether pauper and peasant should get a separate heading of Budget Formats or whether they should just go in the non-singleton 'Other' category. Another problem is the other category might get kinda large in some of those.
Two. Additions.
Would add Vintage and maybe Tiny Leaders
Three. Type of activity.
I address posts on the main page first (new threads) then I go to the Blind Eternities, Economics, and Modern forums. I have my favourite forums and I stick to them mostly.
I enjoy discussing theoretical decks and card usage in the modern forum. I use it to talk about the competitive meta and new ideas.
Four. Overall layout.
I would like an overall visual layout to look like this. I like the headings with the subforms below them. Personally I think at the moment each forum heading takes up too much space because it shows multiple of the most recently active threads. You have to scroll WAY too much in my opinion.
May 25, 2015 10:40 a.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #4
I never really noticed that there were that many forums, since all we seem to see on the page are deck help, modern, economics, and an occasional thread from a couple others.
TL and Vintage could probably be added. As for the organizing, I don't really see a problem with the current method... Have you gotten complaints or anything Epoch? I mean, I guess that it's sort of hard the first couple times you want to post something, but it's easy to navigate after that.
As for activity, I stick to the front page posts help if I can on most things besides Deck Help. I don't really go looking for anything else in other forums.
May 25, 2015 10:42 a.m. Edited.
No specific complaints as far as I know, but as the forums are expanding and new ones added, some way of grouping forums together to make navigation a bit easier (less scrolling) could potentially be a good thing.
May 25, 2015 10:44 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #6
I was hashing out some rudimentary groupings a while ago.
The Site
Site Updates
Site Support (rename from TappedOut)
The Game
General
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation
Lore
Online Magic
Gear
Formats
Competitive
Standard
Modern
Legacy
Vintage
Limited
Pauper
Social
Commander
Tiny Leaders
Cube
The Kitchen Table
The Community
Social
Challenges and Articles
The Blind Eternities
The Marketplace
Economics
The Trading Post
In this model, Deck Help would be integrated into the format forums as individual, format-specific subforums.
One of the issues raised by the above model, however, is that "Competitive" and "Social" may not be the best labels for organizing the formats. Is it better to list all of the formats under one grouping? Would dividing them into categories be helpful?
May 25, 2015 10:46 a.m. Edited.
I love that arrangement except the competitive and social subgrouping. You could just have all under 'Formats' you'd only have 9 or 10 in that category when you clicked on it which is fewer forums than we have now!
Edit: I like that MTGS has a 'Creativity' heading for custom cards and new lore and stories etc.
May 25, 2015 10:48 a.m. Edited.
Epochalyptik says... #8
@FAMOUSWATERMELON: There haven't been many complaints, but the Forums tab isn't very easy to navigate, and the forums themselves aren't really grouped apart from being listed in a particular order.
By contrast, sites like MTGS have a more hierarchical organization that helps users group and find different forums. This is also beneficial because it helps to communicate the purposes of the forums.
May 25, 2015 10:48 a.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #9
Organization definitely wouldn't hurt, of course. Also, I would maybe make a Q&A Forum (instead of the Q&A Section). It would be way easier to find, answer questions, and the number of misplaced threads would probably go down a bunch.
EDIT: Also, love the "Social" and "Competitive" groupings. That would probably spark an argument or two XD
May 25, 2015 10:49 a.m. Edited.
Epochalyptik says... #10
It already sparked an argument or two in another forum.
I've suggested a few times that we create a faux forum listing for the Q&A so we can integrate it into the forum display. However, I disagree with the idea that the Q&A should be converted into a forum; the Q&A's current setup allows for features like display order based on resolved/unresolved, resolved/unresolved period, and accepted answers. This, I think, gives us an edge over forum-based Q&A sections like that of MTGS, which are more prone to necroing or misposting.
May 25, 2015 11:01 a.m.
YAY!
Maybe hubs for forums? Beyond the basic though, like for decks, format=forum, and the hubs=the hubs. That might be too confusing though...
Also, the reminder system (Red Speech Bubble) is broken for me, and only holds things there for a few hours, and then it erases it. That's been going on for maybe a bit more than a month for me. Can it be fixed?
May 25, 2015 11:08 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
@Scorprix: If you're subscribed to a highly active thread, then that thread's notifications all count toward the "memory" of the reminder system. But this is not the place to discuss this; if you have a site support question, please post it in a new thread.
I don't understand what you mean when you say "hubs for forums."
May 25, 2015 11:23 a.m.
ThisIsBullshit says... #13
Epochalyptik I really like how you grouped the forums, with the exception of competitive and social. If you grouped those into constructed and limited, for example, that would be pretty awesome.
May 25, 2015 11:45 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #14
"Limited" is really just a standalone forum at that point; it includes anything that isn't constructed, and, while you could separate it into Draft, Sealed, and Cube, the end result is still that Constructed is frontloaded with everything else.
What about the Singleton/Non-Singleton/Limited structure that ChiefBell proposed? Is that a good compromise?
May 25, 2015 11:49 a.m.
ThisIsBullshit says... #15
Maybe, but the same problem still exists- Singleton is just Commander and TL, and non-Singleton still gets most of the forums.
Also, is it necessary? If we just have the format forums, do we need to break it down more?
May 25, 2015 11:52 a.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #17
I say split 'Deck Help' divided up into their separate categories. Have it under Standard Forum - Deck Help. Same with modern,etc. Then you don't have to click on a link that sounds interesting to find out it was about EDH or Legacy which you have no knowledge of.
May 25, 2015 12:02 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #18
That's something we've been discussing on and off for a while. It's just that we'd need a subforum system to get it to work.
On the topic of format headings, I'd like to break it down a bit more than that. I think it would be helpful to categorize formats into groups if possible.
May 25, 2015 1:15 p.m. Edited.
Standard, Modern and Legacy are not competitive formats on it's on, only when players play like so they become. There should be places to discuss each format, and probably a place to discuss competitive play.
May 25, 2015 1:48 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #21
Standard, Modern, and Legacy are definitely competitive formats...
May 25, 2015 1:50 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #22
Without rehashing the entirety of the debate from the other thread, the reason I chose "Competitive" as a label for those formats is that the majority (i.e., almost the entirety) of the time someone mentions these formats, it's in a competitive context, whether that be for FNM play or for an event. In the rare instance that someone is casually playing Modern or something else, that person will almost always make it explicit that they're playing casually because it's not the expectation. At that point, they're really just using the format to define a card pool rather than discussing the meta or what works within a competitive context. It doesn't really make sense to separate Modern into competitive and noncompetitive discussions at the organizational level because the expectation is, by and large, that Modern means FNM, PTQ, or otherwise event-level play.
On the other hand, formats like Commander are played socially, regardless of whether the playgroup is casual or competitive in its inclinations.
May 25, 2015 1:53 p.m.
I, as a user, would not post about casual a Legacy deck in the Competitive Category since it's not the place for that. But that's me.
May 25, 2015 1:56 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #24
If you're posting about your deck, then it's a nonfactor anyway because it should be going in the Deck Help forum or subforum and not in the format discussion forum.
May 25, 2015 1:57 p.m.
I think he was just saying any random casual Legacy deck not specifically his own Legacy deck and how to make it better.
Which is an eloquent reason why the whole competitive / other tag is sort of problematic. It somehow gives people the wrong idea about what should and should not go into those forums.
May 25, 2015 2:09 p.m.
Majority of mtg players or tappedout users?
We currently have Competitive as a hub, my sense was that by and large this community in particular biases towards casual.
May 25, 2015 2:28 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #27
How about an option to bump forums up, or down depending on what you want to see. Then saving it so it sticks them where you want it.
May 25, 2015 3:12 p.m.
GreenGhost says... #29
I think that deck help should move out of it's own thread and instead become a part of the fourm it's relevant in. For example if I wanted help on my modern deck I would post in the deck help thread within the modern fourm. I'm not sure how doable this is or if it would be counter intuitive but it's just an idea.
May 25, 2015 3:20 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #30
I assume it would mean users are able to prioritize or favorite certain forums and have those forums display higher on the forum directory.
Also, threads are different from forums. Deck Help is a forum, and it may become several subforums. A thread is the thing we're currently posting in: a single discussion within a forum.
May 25, 2015 3:21 p.m. Edited.
GreenGhost says... #31
I agree having a personal ranking system for the fourms would make it much nicer to use. I spend a fair amount of time looking through the modern fourms and it would be so much more convenient for me if I could have it display at the top.
May 25, 2015 3:22 p.m.
GreenGhost says... #33
So then have a subfourm for deck help within each major format? Does that make more sense?
May 25, 2015 3:24 p.m.
Deck help is already set to be split by format. No need to explore that idea, it's Coming.
May 25, 2015 3:25 p.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #35
Bumping is a good idea, instead of having to repost something you still need help on/addressed, just click a bump button back up to the top. Have a time limit on it like 'One bump per 24hrs' or some such.
May 25, 2015 3:40 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #36
If I want to see the EDH forum first, then I could just click an up arrow until it is at the top. I can drop the standard forum since I don't really care for it.
Just the current layout with a little arrow in the corner of each forum bar to change the order.
May 25, 2015 3:43 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #37
Isn't that sufficiently covered by the "Most active" section of the individual forum displays?
Also, "recently added" is currently redundant because the threads are listed newest first.
@Didg: I don't know how that idea would work with the forum groupings.
May 25, 2015 3:44 p.m. Edited.
Didgeridooda says... #38
That way I can drop the site, standard, custom cards down. Bring BE, EDH, Traders to the top. My preferences are not the ones I think would be the most active. Also, I was guessing BE would drop to the bottom automatically.
May 25, 2015 3:54 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #39
It would be more of an individual account setting then a site organized layout.
May 25, 2015 3:57 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #40
Where's custom cards in that section Epochalyptik? In community? Also, sticking "the marketplace" underneath "the game" seems like a better choice because economics and the trading post are fairly active portions of the site and would be better to leave them up top. Also, stick gear in "the marketplace" since it has to deal with product quality and price, and other users advertising some of their products through say, kickstarter or finding awesome online deals.
May 25, 2015 4:02 p.m.
jandrobard says... #41
About the competitive/social sections: is a distinction between Standard, Modern, Legacy, etc. and Commander, Tiny Leaders, etc. necessary? The resultant confusion and nerdrage seem like they'd outweigh the orderliness and general helpfulness.
Just my two cents.
May 25, 2015 4:48 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #42
@Didgeridooda: Yes, but if the site is displaying different forums in different groupings, I'm not sure how you would change their order. Unless you could extract the "favorited" forums to the top of the listings and then display everything else normally.
@Femme_Fatale: Yes, Custom cards would go into Community. I think it might also be worth having a separate forum for custom gear and alters if we go that route. I put Marketplace at the bottom because I didn't want to shortchange the format forums, which handle most of the site's discussion once you factor in the Deck Help threads. Maybe that's not an issue in practice? I can half agree with moving Gear to Marketplace; it's kind of the odd one out in Game.
@jandrobard: I tend to mentally group formats already, but I guess not everybody thinks that way. I just figured it may be easier to somehow segregate event-oriented formats so the competitive crowd will have one water cooler, so to speak, and the casual crowd will have another. This would, in theory, help users discuss the game with the kinds of players most likely to share or understand their needs.
Am I overthinking it, or does this actually sound like there could be something to it?
May 25, 2015 6:13 p.m.
Epochalyptik I do think that alters definitely need to have their own forum now, I want to see more people get into it. Once they do, it will explode on this site.
May 25, 2015 6:16 p.m.
ThisIsBullshit says... #44
Epoch: although I see where you're coming from, I feel like having those forums labeled as "competitive" or "casual/social" would discourage competitive Commander/TL players from posting in the forums if it's labeled as casual, and same with the others. If someone has a random jank idea, they might not want to post it because the Modern forum is labeled as competitive.
Don't forget all the arguments about whether Limited and the like are competitive or not.
Also, that falls under the same issue my suggestion did. Commander and TL get one label, everything else is grouped under the other.
I'm not trying to knock your ideas, I promise.
May 25, 2015 6:51 p.m. Edited.
Epochalyptik says... #45
I didn't bring casual into the discussion for that reason, but I see the argument.
I guess the next question is whether we should implement labels at all (such as sanctioned/unsanctioned or singleton/non-singleton/Limited) or whether the format forums are sufficiently organized into one family. I personally feel like some granularity is preferable.
Also, I never take offense to people criticizing my ideas, provided there's a reason. If I couldn't rely on you all to offer criticism, you would have little to offer at all.
May 25, 2015 6:56 p.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #46
Not regarding forums per say, but still in the spirit of change. Could we maybe make trade interactions better by adding a country indicator on individual users binder page for those wanting to avoid international shipping and such before getting all excited about someones inventory?. Not everyone mentions it in their descriptions, and it would be extremely helpful to know. Just like a little Flag beside their name or something...
May 25, 2015 7:14 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #47
This isn't really the appropriate place to discuss other features, but you're welcome to start a new thread and get some support for your idea.
May 25, 2015 7:18 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #48
This feels like the organization on my mac. There are a million folders in another million folders, and it's just way over thought. That's obviously an exaggeration, but I think you get the point. Also, would the subsections be in spoilers or would they be different links?
May 25, 2015 7:19 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #49
The actual design is really up to yeaGO's implementation. I'm partial to the traditional forum layout (see MTGS's home page) because it's what I grew up with, so to speak.
May 25, 2015 7:25 p.m.
I personally like the split that chiefbell had. i'm sorry that i dont have much more to add, but it seems like most people are focusing on how epoch was splitting up competitive/social.
Kryzis says... #2
Possible additions: Vintage, Tiny Leaders, Planechase
May 25, 2015 10:33 a.m.