The Choice is Yours  permalink

New-look board

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 133
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by anna - HOST (U2219604) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    Hi all, I thought you'd like to see this blog post about progress:

    www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...

    A

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    Thankyou Anna, most enlightning.


    And presumably for their next job they will be re-inventing the wheel.
    Then after giving everybody something that won't work properly they will be telling us they are building the release candidate for the next version that will have the spokes further apart, the axle in the middle but no word on revising the shape, which will remain square.
    GHU.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    And whats more, when I posted the above on their blog, they removed it.

    So everyone, they're definitely reading your comments, but be prepared to have them throw their toys of of their pram if you dare criticise them.

    Shocking, absolutely shocking.

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by John99 (U13871221) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    Thanks for the information Anna.

    23 fixes needed !
    Lets hope they work. I wonder if they missed anything ?

    I consider the message about board closing to be ambiguous, and I dont think it is included in the list. (blogwww.bbc.co.uk/blogs/... )

    And for anyone looking back to the old thread which is no longer sticky it will be here: www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb...

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Bert Coules (U10586930) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    I wonder if they missed anything? 
    I'd like to see the body of each post clearly differentiated from its header, either by the use of a different font size or a background colour and subtle framing. The R7 boards (still unchanged) demonstrate how effective this can be, how accommodating to read, and how much easier on the eye.

    Back here, every other post looks rather lost too, at the moment, a tiny island of text adrift in a huge ocean of whiteness.

    The same differentiation problem also applies to the new formatting for quotes. Unattributed italics is a hugely retrograde step.



    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by maude (U14168685) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    " In reply to U14576049:

    And whats more, when I posted the above on their blog, they removed it.

    So everyone, they're definitely reading your comments, but be prepared to have them throw their toys of of their pram if you dare criticise them.

    Shocking, absolutely shocking."





    There is nothing shocking about the BBC refuting criticism and going to any lengths to cement their position.

    What better example is there than the Balen report?

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Majikthise (U14574956) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010















    "... 23 fixes needed !
    Lets hope they work. I wonder if they missed anything ? ..."  










    Well how about these ( don't think they've been listed elsewhere yet ):









    1. Pointless extraneous line-feeds are not stripped out;









    2. Posts during the most recent 60 minutes are dated, and the number of minutes ago that they were posted is indicated (but not updated unless you reload / refresh the page, so the "number of minutes ago" becomes incorrect after one minute of display;

    Posts made between 60 minutes ago and less than 120 minutes ago show neither the number of minutes, nor the number of hours ago that they were posted - only the date;

    Posts made over 120 minutes ago and up to 24 hours ago show the date and number of hours ago - minutes truncated to display the whole number of hours since posting. ....

    Why not just specify the date and time that the post was posted - that is always going to be correct assuming the server's clock is correct, .....

    What on earth is the supposed advantage of convoluted and inconsistent messing around with dates, duration since posting in minutes or hours or neither ?




    3. "Recent Discussions" - in the right-hand column (at 19:25 on 13 Oct.) identifies a Thread with title:

    Swing & Roundabouts

    as:

    Swing & Roundabouts

    so the software (or I.T. trainee) seems not to know whether to present plain text punctuation or HTML codes (where these are different);




    Frankly, the list goes on and on !

    My advice to the so-called " Scrum - Sprint " development team:

    these boards should revert back to their earlier incarnation (which worked) and if you are hell bent on changing them, .....

    get to grips with what you are supposed to be doing and how you want the system to work then build and test it in a development lab before you impose it on the general public again.











    --
    Majikthise.

















    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Joe_the_Gardener (U3478064) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    Anna,

    I didn't notice anything in that list about the rubbish font and spacing. Does this mean it's considered to be OK?

    Joe

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by John99 (U13871221) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    <quote>1. Pointless extraneous line-feeds are not stripped out;
    </quote>
    Possibly they thought we could be allowed double linefeeds, there is virtually no other formatting available now.

    <quote>2 Post timings</quote>
    I guess they are aware of that, it has drawn some comment, maybe it will be changed

    <quote>3 ampersands <quote>
    That has been an intermittent fault along with the Goblededook bug for a few months, and has been reported previously, lets hope it gets fixed along with the 'emoticons in brackets' & Jekyll & Hyde problem


    Anna will I hope be monitoring this thread and making notes to pass on to the development team.

    Lets hope any new fixes are introduced initially only on one messageboard and not across all boards, just in-case they cause problems again.

    Oh presumably the BBC is aware the timings and highlighted as unread 'my discussions' are often plain wrong, but I am sure they are looking at that. I note the blog list of fixes includes

    <quote>- Remove excessive amounts of pagination buttons on Forum page</quote>
    I am not sure what that means, maybe it relates to the problems with posts per page shifting and page numbering being wrong.
    I hope it does NOT mean reducing pagination to older/newer, That will make navigation through longer threads impossible.

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by waiting4atickle (U1982670) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    New-look indeed! As far as I can see, all these fixes that are being worked on will, if and when they are applied, merely return the functionality of the board to where it was before. So the only effect - and presumably the only objective - of this bug-ridden re-launch will be to create a new look for the board.

    A look that virtually no-one likes or wants, and about which no-one was consulted.

    Speak up, Meldrew.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by Russ (U2360818) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    I hope it does NOT mean reducing pagination to older/newer, That will make navigation through longer threads impossible. 
    Good point; I agree, John. I had not twigged the meaning of 'Forum' in the blog post either. The blog list 'unknowns' perhaps need to be questioned more closely, otherwise any lack of opposition will be taken as carte blanche to continue wrecking the joint.

    Russ

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by nasigoreng (U14327386) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    Thank you Anna.

    I felt quite uplifted until I clicked on the link.

    322 words - only one clickable link on DNA for clarification of the term.
    If DNA counts as one word, then at least a quarter of the remaining blog post is incomprehensible to me and I'm not a newbie.
    As someone has already said, there is no mention at all of the most frequently raised issues.
    Such arrogance....

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Mike Waller (U4782937) on Wednesday, 13th October 2010

    FAQs says that quotations should be indicated thus <quote> at the beginning and end. To make life easier I have tried to adopt yet either I am going mad or the wretched new system keeps eliminating them!!!! Why?

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by Dermod (U14282701) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    The end 'quote' has to have an oblique / in it as the 2nd character, just like the old board format. < /quote >.

    (The 'compiler' on this board always eliminates control codes when it recognises them, that is why I've put in spaces, of course the spaces stop the control codes from working!)

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by Ceiderduck (U14588518) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    Er....why does POV BBC & TV not feature in the 'Other BBC Messageboards' bit? Oversight? smiley - erm

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Rumbaba (U13744896) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    The rollout of the 'new look' messageboards is what my old boss would have referred to as 're-inventing the square wheel'.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by John99 (U13871221) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    They may not wish to list all the messgaeboards, but they could have included a link to that listing in the short list.
    "All Message Boards" - www.bbc.co.uk/messag...
    And maybe also the blogs list - www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Ceiderduck (U14588518) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    They may not wish to list all the messgaeboards, but they could have included a link to that listing in the short list.
    "All Message Boards" - www.bbc.co.uk/messag...
     


    That would be a much better link to include. There are still some links which bring up ALL the boards, including ones long closed, which is pretty pointless to me

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    Listen all of you, posting all the bugs you found is a WASTE OF TIME!
    And whats more, its DOING THEIR JOB FOR THEM.

    Its OUTRAGEOUS that there is a separate formatting thread where they expect you to address technical aspects of these boards!

    ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ALL KNOW these boards are supposed to be for 'talking about R4 progs' otherwise they get shut down for being off topic.
    Now when its suits THEM they change the rules.

    This whole farago is a disgrace!

    There is NO avenue of redress, no channel to ask the highly relevant questions of how this has come about and been handled so badly.
    And most shameful of all, their prickly oversensitivity of criticism.

    I posted some text FROM ANOTHER BBC NEWS PAGE so I doubt there would be copyright probs about GAP reverting to their old logo after a disasterous disliked launch of a new logo and wondered if there was a lesson that might be heeded there.
    Result?
    Pulled.

    I posted on the blog the comment which I included earlier here about reinventing the wheel, and telling us after giving us something that didn't work, that they would 'have a candidate for a upgrade where the spokes were further apart, the axle moved to the middle but no word on the shape which would remain square.'
    It lasted about 30minutes on the blog then was pulled.

    Its simple, either THEY don't get it, or WE don't get their hidden agenda.
    Either way its a shocking, SHOCKING indictment .

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by madfor4 (U6248038) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    Let's just say that this has not been their finest hour.
    Explanationary links that take you to the 'old layout'
    etc., etc.

    None of this fiasco will 'see the light of day' other than in our posts.
    We, the users, must 'lump it'.

    Auntie knows best. Even if 'knowing best' results in highly paid IT experts producing something which a 16 year old "typing from their Mother's basement." ( to borrow part of the gospel, according to Andrew Marr) would be ashamed of.

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by Ceiderduck (U14588518) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    There's been some discussion that the new design looks 'particularly good' on mobile devices. CAn I just say that it doesn't? Cheersmiley - ale

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Robert Carnegie (U982882) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    Is there a problem with the big cheerful spider then ((smiley - smiley)) I hope not.

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by Nick'74 (U8491954) on Thursday, 14th October 2010

    Hello,

    Just wanted to say that the only message board I go on is the "BBC Television" message board. The only reason I came on here was to find out something about R4 but I couldn't believe how awful the layout and design of these message boards are compared to the BBC Television one.

    The trouble is that one message is on a faint square, the next one hasn't got anything around it. It's just on white.
    On the BBC Television MB each message is in a box of it's own which automatically makes it look better. It makes it feel seperate. The whole look of it is far more simple and easy on the eye.

    I've always believed that 'simple is best' and I also believe in that saying "If it aint broke don't fix it". The problem is that you'll always get some Horray Henry come along and want to change something simply for change sake, just to make a name for themselves and they always end up making it worse. That's the trouble when people change things just for change sake, it always ends up worse than before. To make all those ridiulous changes is just stupid. They think they're making life easier for us, they're just making it more complicated. You know you're on a hiding to nothing when they can't see what they're doing wrong.

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by pan shoshana (U9947496) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Well, this is one way to put people off using this MB anymore.

    I've been around the BBCR4 boards for enough years to be able to declare that this revision is definitely the worst - it feels minimalist and starkly impersonal as well as less simple to navigate.

    It's look is pared down and disjointed - there is no obvious continuity of discussion flow.

    I think I'll order flowers and black edged cards...

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by PetPig (U9766236) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    What's happened to 'Start New Discussion' on this board this morning??

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 25.

    Posted by PetPig (U9766236) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    It's suddenly reappeared!
    Is the new 'design' a wicked plot by the BBC to make us all think we're the ones who are mad?

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by pan shoshana (U9947496) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    I've just been looking for the 'log out' button - but I can't see it! Oh no - it's the Hotel California....Eek!

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by pan shoshana (U9947496) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    and I've just realised the stars have gone out (well, the double asterisks denoting a real, living poster present).

    I'm off to Ambridge - at least they let you leave when you've had enough...

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 28.

    Posted by Robert Carnegie (U982882) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Apart from real, living posters, whO else is writing here? Gilbert Harding?

    Some of these things are to be fixed shortly - next week - according to the linked article from message 1.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 29.

    Posted by madfor4 (U6248038) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Some of these things are to be fixed shortly - next week - according to the linked article from message 1  .

    At 13.30..."Roger Bolton investigates why hundreds of you are up-in-arms over changes to the BBC radio message boards."

    I look forward to hearing how, "It's great, just minor 'teething troubles' which are to be expected" "Blah, Blah, Blah"!

    What is disappointing is that it took a poster to announce the fact that this is being discussed on the radio. Where was the 'Host'?

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    pan shoshana:
    I've just been looking for the 'log out' button - but I can't see it! Oh no - it's the Hotel California....Eek! 
    You're free to leave at any time, but would you mind telling us why? smiley - smiley

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by handsomefortune (U2927651) on Friday, 15th October 2010



    < Where was the 'Host'? <

    erm... give in!

    what activity was evidently considered more important? what might explain no announcement? ;@.

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by madfor4 (U6248038) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    what might explain no announcement? ;@. 

    The subject is, obviously, on-topic; otherwise the exprssion, "ton of bricks", comes to mind.

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by John99 (U13871221) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Roger Bolton investigates why hundreds of you are up-in-arms over changes to the BBC radio message boards.

    The feedback prog mentioning messageboards havoc should with luck be available on iPlayer, and probably even as a podcast.
    Feedback site: www.bbc.co.uk/progra...
    Todays programme page - www.bbc.co.uk/progra...

    The programme will also repeat at 8pm on Sunday 17th

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Like I said, you are all pissing in the wind.
    If on the R3 boards (mercifully left as they were, at least for the moment) you look at 'my discussions' the listing you get all shows that there are 0 new posts to any thread, though the 'most recent post x minutes ago' if shorter than the last time you looked at that thread must indicate that there ARE new posts!

    INCOMPETENT INCOMEPETENT INCOMPETENT INCOMPETENT.

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    I don't know if I'll be the first to comment after hearing Feedback but all I can say is pissing in the wind is an understatement.

    The spokeman really explained everything didn't he?

    Hey you on the Archers boards, be afraid, be VERY afraid.

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by JeanHartrick (U2756124) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    He said that if they hadn't done their revamp, The templates would have started to break'. 

    What does that mean, please?

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by Nick'74 (U8491954) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    R3 boards (mercifully left as they were 

    I've just had a look at the R3 MB. The design is much better than the R4 MB. They're very similar to the BBC Television MB with each message in its own box. It feels seperated when you look at it which makes each message more personal which makes the people who use the forum feel subconciously happier when they're using it. God I'm getting a bit deep here. Maybe I should design message boards for a living. If I did have a complaint with the R3 MB its that they're grey but never mind.

    When you write a message you want it to stand out but when you take the box away it seems to blend in with all the other writing around it. Come on R4 MB designers, let's have EVERY message in its own box like the R3 message boards and the tv ones.

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 37.

    Posted by Somali_Bus_Conductor (U14006101) on Friday, 15th October 2010


    The templates would have started to break'.
     


    Looks suspiciously like B***hit to me!

    Having got our templates at work to, er, work, we leave them strictly alone! They are pretty complex, and it costs money to change them, which is a further incentive.

    Why on earth should they have broken down? Templates are meant to be durable, that's why we have these mark up languages.

    Given that the change resulted in an extended loss of functionality it would be interesting to see just how frightful the consequences of continuing to use the old templates might have been.

    I don't in any event suppose that there was any explanation of the weird set of BBC priorities whereby one can talk for ever about Noah's Flood, or how to get pregnant, but not discuss Science!

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 37.

    Posted by PetPig (U9766236) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    The templates would have started to break' 

    I've just listened to Feedback too! -Not a very convincing response. I suppose all we're going to get from them is 'it was something that needed doing, and terrible things would have happened if we'd left it alone, and it's no use really explaining it further to you non-techies.'



    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by Jem Stone (U517591) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Hi. Sorry it is difficult to explain what happened in 2 minutes of radio and some of my explanations were edited ou for lengtht. There's more detail and links to the lists of improvements/fixes in a blog post i wrote this morning for the BBC Radio blog:

    www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...


  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by PetPig (U9766236) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Thanks for the link, Jem, and thanks for talking to us! (The time to discuss messageboard problems on Feedback was very limited. I suppose if they had allocated more time, the non-messageboard-frequenting listeners would have go t a bit bored!)

    Well, I can understand the need to tackle 'templates' and bugs, but, like many of my fellow-posters, I can't understand why a clear, visually attractive format had to be changed for a less readable, less attractive one.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by Somali_Bus_Conductor (U14006101) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    I don't like to seem over fussy, but there are several formatting errors on the link that you've given us, in fact it looks remarkably like it's also in an early stage of development.

    No doubt it's just, me, but who was asking for topics to be made 'stickies'? I don't recall any such comment on any of the boards I look at.

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by John99 (U13871221) on Friday, 15th October 2010


    Hey you on the Archers boards, be afraid, be VERY afraid. 


    In fact the Archers seems to have a temporary reprieve:

    I had scheduled The Archers message board to be upgraded by the end of the month. However we've now put that back until we've done some more testing and I'm satisfied that the latest round of bug fixing is successful. { www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Was it just me, or was there no explanation for why we were ignored by the host for three days while 'mayhem' (Roger Bolton's word) ensued?

    The templates might have broke... what, are they anything like levees? Would Radio 4 have flooded?

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by Jem Stone (U517591) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    - "templates would have broken" . Well the navigation elements that wrap around the page such as the Black BBC bar and the blue Radio 4 bar with the iPlayer links etc would no longer be able to be updated automatically. Also the logged in/ID status bar "Jem Stone | settings | Sign out" bar wouldn't display.

    - Hands up. We could have done a better job of responding in the first few days after the upgrade. Roger didn't specifically ask me that. If he had i'd have admitted it.

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by Somali_Bus_Conductor (U14006101) on Friday, 15th October 2010


    I had scheduled The Archers message board to be upgraded by the end of the month. However we've now put that back until we've done some more testing and I'm satisfied that the latest round of bug fixing is successful.
     

    My word!
    What an idea!
    Shame it wasn't thought of a while ago.

    If you are going to put some sort of computer software in front of others to use then it has to be very fully tested. Users will throw things at software you would never think anyone would want to do.

    In the case of the message boards revamp it's certainly difficult to see how 'testing' can have failed to reveal that it wasn't possible to start a new topic, or that the 'new posts' count doesn't work reliably, or indeed many of the other defects that rapidly became apparent.

    There is a way to develop new applications, including devising tests to ensure that the software does what it was specified that it should do. Didn't the BBC or its message board manager follow these? And why not?

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Its utter bullshit.
    Are they telling us the R3 boards and the Atchers boards are going to break?

    Of course they're not/
    What ISbroken is the R4 boards at the hands of these incompetents.

    Bolton was useless too.

    Nothing about the NUMBER of posts of complaint.
    Nothing about the litany of errors.
    Nothing about the elementary mistake in opening times.
    And the spokesman was allowed to say the inability to start a new thread was for only 48hrs.
    Presumably he meant 48hrs of the open board not 2 days!

    Just listen to him, would YOU trust him?

    Its b0110x

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 46.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Friday, 15th October 2010

    Jem Stone:
    Hands up. We could have done a better job of responding in the first few days after the upgrade. Roger didn't specifically ask me that. If he had i'd have admitted it. 
    I noticed he didn't ask (I listened on my Ericsson in the supermarket, then at home after recording it on Sky+). It would have been a better question than his 'start a thread' one (so up on the terminology,that Roger), when that had already been fixed. There is no way the lack of 'feedback' (NPI) wasn't a major complaint from many posters. It's a recurring theme with the programme that when something that one is interested in comes up, Bolton's disinterest in batting for the listeners becomes painfully evident.

    My complaint, though, was about the loss of delineation between posts, and how painfully white the layout is now. Just because 'Feedback' failed to raise that issue either, don't think anyone has forgotten about it. I hope to see this *all* addressed in a blog coming soon, and for anna to advertise that blog entry when it is.

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 49.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

Back to top

About this Board

This was the BBC Radio 4 messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

The Radio 4 messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Other BBC Messageboards

Copyright © 2014 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.