----------- NEW -------------- FiPG Rating System ----------

theysayjump

21-11-2006 19:26:31

FreeiPodGuide has developed a Rating System to make it easier for you to gauge an opinion on how well a site or network are doing, based on various different criteria.

With the help of dmorris68 who did the coding as well as around 20 other dedicated members who have given up their time to contribute ideas, discussion and content, over the last 6 months or so we've finally finished this Ratings System.

The members who have contributed and who will continue to contribute will remain anonymous for the time being.

The sites/networks are rated by each member based on their overall experience with any given site/network, and they only rate sites when they have actually finished it. Each site is rated between 0.1 and a 5.0, and is indicated as such on the graph. To access the ratings just click on the link at the top of the page

http/" alt=""/img295.imageshack.us/img="295/5002/ratingpi2.png[" alt=""/img1f468e6be8]

Here is the direct link to the page

[url=]http//forum.freeipodguide.com/coe/site_ratings.php[]http//forum.freeipodguide.com/coe/site_ratings.php[/url]

We welcome any and all comments, suggestions, criticism or other feedback and will take them all into consideration.

Killer722

21-11-2006 19:28:41

Sweet addition. Nice job dmorris and friends. )

zdub08

21-11-2006 19:30:28

#9 is a harsh critic

kdollar

21-11-2006 19:33:19

i seriously applaud admin and the mods for giving honest opinions, as seen FusionCash is at no. 3. not an anonymous no. 1, tyler the great!

Crynos

21-11-2006 19:35:12

Papa like, good job everyone involved, spiritual +kma to all of you.

Just wondering how free4me is so low though, has something changed with them? Its been a few months, but when I did them they were one of the best

Godrockdj

21-11-2006 19:42:36

Sweet feature, thanks for all the hard work everyone!

Ps - I like how the title of the page is "FIPG Council of Elders" ;)

geej86

21-11-2006 19:43:47

so will it continue to be these 20 members who rank sites? Or will it be open to everyone...or whats the deal with that? I don't have any problem whatsoever i'm just trying to clarify that's all.

great work though def! very useful

edit just wondering if these rankings will change with time, or if updates will be made, or somehow realtime and i'm making a fool of myself

ilanbg

21-11-2006 19:46:21

Awesome feature. Good job COE.

geej Frankly, there are some people on these forums that should not influence how others perceive these sites. I think a hand selected group is better. The staff can always change it if it doesn't meet their standards.

TryinToGetPaid

21-11-2006 19:46:36

I do not like the new look the forum is undergoing.

geej86

21-11-2006 19:48:59

[quote6176a40120="ilanbg"]Awesome feature. Good job COE.

geej Frankly, there are some people on these forums that should not influence how others perceive these sites. I think a hand selected group is better. The staff can always change it if it doesn't meet their standards.[/quote6176a40120]

yea i agree totally. I guess my one suggestion would just be to update every [some time period] just to keep ratings up to date

egyptianruin

21-11-2006 19:52:41

I like. Nice. You make romance explosion in my mouth?

theysayjump

21-11-2006 19:56:33

I'm still changing things around so it's not completely finished yet, also I think dmorris68 still has some things to finish up, but for now it serves its purpose.

The reason that it's a closed group is because if it was open to the public, one person who was (rightfully) placed on hold, could vote, or rate or however it would happen and give a certain site/network the lowest score possible, just because they have a grudge against them.

This way it's a more accurate portrayal of how well a site or network is doing, as all of the members are actively pursuing sites and have had an active site completion history.

As I said, please suggest anything that you think would help or better this, we're seriously welcome and open to all ideas.

dmorris68

21-11-2006 19:56:51

[quoteb3b83fd4a9="geej86"]yea i agree totally. I guess my one suggestion would just be to update every [some time period] just to keep ratings up to date[/quoteb3b83fd4a9]
The ratings are totally dynamic, and the chart updates in real-time. We are still debating on whether to allow 24/7 updates by the raters, or only open it for updates on a specified interval. Currently they can update their ratings at any time, and the numbers and charts will change accordingly.

[quoteb3b83fd4a9="egyptianruin"]I like. Nice. You make romance explosion in my mouth?[/quoteb3b83fd4a9]
Oh. Baby. Oh.

Something tells me that line is from Borat. And yet I still find it t3h seckseh.

bruman

21-11-2006 19:58:40

Eh, it's allright

YourGiftsFree

21-11-2006 20:00:22

I love it! .1 more! lol

Daggoth

21-11-2006 20:02:18

I think some of the voting is [i8b7f3429c9]really[/i8b7f3429c9] messed up. Member #9 voted Orderit4Free and AnyGift4Free as .5 but GetFriends as 2.5.... wtf?

Edit How the hell did GetFriends get above AnyGift4Free?!

theysayjump

21-11-2006 20:05:17

Some of the people we are still waiting on them to update their scores since we had quite a long lull in anything being done about it.

Also, remember it's all based on the personal experience of each member. In that regard, the members were chosen by the Mods/Admins and we made sure not to chose anyone whom we may think would abuse the system or (to be blunt) was an idiot.

Daggoth

21-11-2006 20:09:32

[quote87ca90ba32="theysayjump"]Some of the people we are still waiting on them to update their scores since we had quite a long lull in anything being done about it.

Also, remember it's all based on the personal experience of each member. In that regard, the members were chosen by the Mods/Admins and we made sure not to chose anyone whom we may think would abuse the system or (to be blunt) was an idiot.[/quote87ca90ba32]

This might be asking too much, but is it possible for sites to voted on by all the people, instead of a hand-few? Ex Set up polls for each site.

egyptianruin

21-11-2006 20:14:22

Maybe this explains the PM from TSJ saying "You are an idiot" lol

JK

dmorris68

21-11-2006 20:14:54

[quote19ab7e7745="Daggoth"][quote19ab7e7745="theysayjump"]Some of the people we are still waiting on them to update their scores since we had quite a long lull in anything being done about it.

Also, remember it's all based on the personal experience of each member. In that regard, the members were chosen by the Mods/Admins and we made sure not to chose anyone whom we may think would abuse the system or (to be blunt) was an idiot.[/quote19ab7e7745]

This might be asking too much, but is it possible for sites to voted on by all the people, instead of a hand-few? Ex Set up polls for each site.[/quote19ab7e7745]
I think TSJ already covered that one

[quote19ab7e7745="theysayjump"]
The reason that it's a closed group is because if it was open to the public, one person who was (rightfully) placed on hold, could vote, or rate or however it would happen and give a certain site/network the lowest score possible, just because they have a grudge against them.

This way it's a more accurate portrayal of how well a site or network is doing, as all of the members are actively pursuing sites and have had an active site completion history. [/quote19ab7e7745]

;)

We considered opening it up to the group, but decided the ratings would be more suspect that way.

Also, this was initially proposed as just a forum poll for each site, using private polling forums for the voting members. However phpBB forum polls don't lend themselves well to statistical tracking/charting. They're just informational numbers within the topic itself. Therefore I took it upon myself to come up with some ad-hoc rating system whereby the ratings are tabulated, stored, and charted dynamically. It is a first-draft and will likely evolve over time, perhaps into something totally different, who knows.

theysayjump

21-11-2006 20:15:10

[quotec3fea10e28="Daggoth"][quotec3fea10e28="theysayjump"]Some of the people we are still waiting on them to update their scores since we had quite a long lull in anything being done about it.

Also, remember it's all based on the personal experience of each member. In that regard, the members were chosen by the Mods/Admins and we made sure not to chose anyone whom we may think would abuse the system or (to be blunt) was an idiot.[/quotec3fea10e28]

This might be asking too much, but is it possible for sites to voted on by all the people, instead of a hand-few? Ex Set up polls for each site.[/quotec3fea10e28]

As I said above

[quotec3fea10e28="theysayjump"]The reason that it's a closed group is because if it was open to the public, one person who was (rightfully) placed on hold, could vote, or rate or however it would happen and give a certain site/network the lowest score possible, just because they have a grudge against them.

This way it's a more accurate portrayal of how well a site or network is doing, as all of the members are actively pursuing sites and have had an active site completion history.[/quotec3fea10e28]

theysayjump

21-11-2006 20:15:50

[quote1a201ba110="egyptianruin"]Maybe this explains the PM from TSJ saying "You are an idiot" lol

JK[/quote1a201ba110]

lol oops

ragefu

21-11-2006 20:56:27

Getfriends should be removed since it's a scam

theysayjump

21-11-2006 21:03:41

[quote715a1d1b12="ragefu"]Getfriends should be removed since it's a scam[/quote715a1d1b12]

I actually did remove it a few days ago, but put it back to show people who may see it and think about signing up that it has a bad rating, they can also read complaints too. Newbies hearing about a site but not seeing a forum won't care and may pursue it.

[quote715a1d1b12="bruman"]Eh, it's allright[/quote715a1d1b12]

Well at least give constructive criticism.

johnjimjones

21-11-2006 21:16:19

Great addition!

FreeEnterprize Joe

21-11-2006 21:18:21

How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?

theysayjump

21-11-2006 21:20:50

[quotedf73f77193="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quotedf73f77193]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?

FreeEnterprize Joe

21-11-2006 21:24:01

Maybe when the users voting have an experience with the site, they give it a score, and when a site has 'x' number of votes they get moved into their own forum & respective category?

kdollar

21-11-2006 21:25:02

honestly, the public is not organized enough, and should be a mod based decision on what the public thinks, such as electoral votes.

johnjimjones

21-11-2006 21:33:26

[quote36d5031aba="theysayjump"][quote36d5031aba="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quote36d5031aba]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quote36d5031aba]

Everyone send me $100.

ilanbg

21-11-2006 21:36:48

[quoted47dad2df3="johnjimjones"][quoted47dad2df3="theysayjump"][quoted47dad2df3="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quoted47dad2df3]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quoted47dad2df3]

Everyone send me $100.[/quoted47dad2df3]

Why? Are you somehow affiliated with the COE?

johnjimjones

21-11-2006 21:37:50

[quote8dd378bd85="ilanbg"][quote8dd378bd85="johnjimjones"][quote8dd378bd85="theysayjump"][quote8dd378bd85="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quote8dd378bd85]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quote8dd378bd85]

Everyone send me $100.[/quote8dd378bd85]

Why? Are you somehow affiliated with the COE?[/quote8dd378bd85]

College doesn't pay itself roll

bruman

21-11-2006 22:01:24

[quote3185ac0ace="theysayjump"][quote3185ac0ace="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quote3185ac0ace]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quote3185ac0ace]

They shouldn't unless they pay for a forum here

FreeEnterprize Joe

21-11-2006 22:04:59

[quote84e9c3a7cd="bruman"][quote84e9c3a7cd="theysayjump"][quote84e9c3a7cd="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quote84e9c3a7cd]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quote84e9c3a7cd]

They shouldn't unless they pay for a forum here[/quote84e9c3a7cd]

123stuffforfree didn't pay for a forum -- the ones who pay for a forum are essentially making a 'security deposit' that says they won't bail on the users.

h3x

21-11-2006 22:09:50

For starters, I think that the ratings should be in the form of a percentage based on the 5-point system.. and I'm not all that crazy about the white box on the right side showing a rating meter... Might I suggest a slim bar beneath the "Control Panel" with a scrolling marquee of the site followed by the percentage... Leave the Ratings option on the Control Panel for detailed information of the sites

Example...

http/" alt=""/img182.imageshack.us/img="182/8185/untitledfx3.png[" alt=""/img9da4b92804]

Just an suggestion shrug

theysayjump

21-11-2006 22:13:31

[quote3634b2b741="h3x"]For starters, I think that the ratings should be in the form of a percentage based on the 5-point system.[/quote3634b2b741]

Care to elaborate a bit more? I think I understand what you're saying, but not 100% (pun intended). wink

EatChex89

21-11-2006 22:16:15

is there anyway to turn it off? because it annoys the fuck out of me and makes everything horizontal scroll

bruman

21-11-2006 22:16:52

[quote978a5f227f="toebash"][quote978a5f227f="bruman"][quote978a5f227f="theysayjump"][quote978a5f227f="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quote978a5f227f]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quote978a5f227f]

They shouldn't unless they pay for a forum here[/quote978a5f227f]

123stuffforfree didn't pay for a forum -- the ones who pay for a forum are essentially making a 'security deposit' that says they won't bail on the users.[/quote978a5f227f]

I know that, but i'm saying they need to actually make an impact on the freebie scene in some way. If they had ratings for every single small site it would get overcrowded. Like FreeEnterprize, being less than a month old - way to young to be considered.

irmuslim

21-11-2006 22:16:52

[quote9ba244d9e1="EatChex89"]is there anyway to turn it off? because it annoys the fuck out of me and makes everything horizontal scroll[/quote9ba244d9e1]
Adblock.

J4320

21-11-2006 22:21:27

[quoteabe6f3dcd5="irmuslim"][quoteabe6f3dcd5="EatChex89"]is there anyway to turn it off? because it annoys the fuck out of me and makes everything horizontal scroll[/quoteabe6f3dcd5]
Adblock.[/quoteabe6f3dcd5]

I have adblock but it's not working for me. It's really annoying me too. Don't get me wrong though, I like this new ratings feature, just not in a big box that distracts me and causes the page to side-scroll.

irmuslim

21-11-2006 22:22:52

[quoteead80020cb="J4320"][quoteead80020cb="irmuslim"][quoteead80020cb="EatChex89"]is there anyway to turn it off? because it annoys the fuck out of me and makes everything horizontal scroll[/quoteead80020cb]
Adblock.[/quoteead80020cb]

I have adblock but it's not working for me. It's really annoying me too. Don't get me wrong though, I like this new ratings feature, just not in a big box that distracts me and causes the page to side-scroll.[/quoteead80020cb]
Try AdBlockPlus. Works fine for me...but I don't like it removed cuz I use fullscreen at 1280x1024 resolution.

theysayjump

21-11-2006 22:22:58

[quotec97c828640="bruman"][quotec97c828640="toebash"]123stuffforfree didn't pay for a forum -- the ones who pay for a forum are essentially making a 'security deposit' that says they won't bail on the users.[/quotec97c828640]

I know that, but i'm saying they need to actually make an impact on the freebie scene in some way. If they had ratings for every single small site it would get overcrowded. Like FreeEnterprize, being less than a month old - way to young to be considered.[/quotec97c828640]

There would be a distinct difference between new sites/networks being given their own forum and being a part of the Ratings System (RS).

We're discussing giving smaller sites their own forum in order to build up a reputation as well as offer news and support to the members who pursue their sites and then after a certain period of time and (hopefully) having established themselves as legit they'd be entered into the RS.

That's my idea anyway.

h3x

21-11-2006 22:23:46

[quote8cc7bfab3a="theysayjump"][quote8cc7bfab3a="h3x"]For starters, I think that the ratings should be in the form of a percentage based on the 5-point system.[/quote8cc7bfab3a]

Care to elaborate a bit more? I think I understand what you're saying, but not 100% (pun intended). wink[/quote8cc7bfab3a]

Edited my post.

FreeEnterprize Joe

21-11-2006 22:25:01

[quote70d222c5fa="bruman"][quote70d222c5fa="toebash"][quote70d222c5fa="bruman"][quote70d222c5fa="theysayjump"][quote70d222c5fa="toebash"]How will the "Other" sites be worked into the system?[/quote70d222c5fa]

That's one of the things we're still discussing.

Any ideas?[/quote70d222c5fa]

They shouldn't unless they pay for a forum here[/quote70d222c5fa]

123stuffforfree didn't pay for a forum -- the ones who pay for a forum are essentially making a 'security deposit' that says they won't bail on the users.[/quote70d222c5fa]

I know that, but i'm saying they need to actually make an impact on the freebie scene in some way. If they had ratings for every single small site it would get overcrowded. Like FreeEnterprize, being less than a month old - way to young to be considered.[/quote70d222c5fa]

I agree with that. I was suggesting that once so many (like 15 out of the 30 or so) of the voters have completed the site (and added a vote to it) it moved to a somewhat legit status.
I'm thinking these voting users have slightly different favorites as far as freebie sites go.

J4320

21-11-2006 22:26:29

[quote43bf0a8c8b="irmuslim"][quote43bf0a8c8b="J4320"][quote43bf0a8c8b="irmuslim"][quote43bf0a8c8b="EatChex89"]is there anyway to turn it off? because it annoys the fuck out of me and makes everything horizontal scroll[/quote43bf0a8c8b]
Adblock.[/quote43bf0a8c8b]

I have adblock but it's not working for me. It's really annoying me too. Don't get me wrong though, I like this new ratings feature, just not in a big box that distracts me and causes the page to side-scroll.[/quote43bf0a8c8b]
Try AdBlockPlus. Works fine for me...but I don't like it removed cuz I use fullscreen at 1280x1024 resolution.[/quote43bf0a8c8b]

Alright, I guess I'll have to if this doesn't get changed.

h3x

21-11-2006 22:26:36

Here's where I would place the rating bar

http/" alt=""/img206.imageshack.us/img="206/1148/untitleddc4.png[" alt=""/img177684df5f]

It could be sized to perfectly seam with the control panel and scroll for more sites... It was just something quick i sketched up with mspaint in 30 seconds lol ;)

J4320

21-11-2006 22:30:01

[quote08da0beca7="h3x"]Here's where I would place the rating bar

http/" alt=""/img206.imageshack.us/img="206/1148/untitleddc4.png[" alt=""/img08da0beca7]

It could be sized to perfectly seam with the control panel and scroll for more sites... It was just something quick i sketched up with mspaint in 30 seconds lol ;)[/quote08da0beca7]

Awesome idea. That's much better. D

EatChex89

21-11-2006 22:46:25

i guess we know who's on the voting comittee licoughlih3xlicoughli

johnjimjones

21-11-2006 22:50:58

We could have a vote for when that network/site gets to the point where the committee / everyone else thinks they're good.

theysayjump

21-11-2006 23:02:26

[quote68beca9e80="EatChex89"]i guess we know who's on the voting comittee licoughlih3xlicoughli[/quote68beca9e80]

We're not going to say who's in the group, but h3x is not one of them.

ilanbg

21-11-2006 23:07:58

[quotedb615237cb="theysayjump"][quotedb615237cb="EatChex89"]i guess we know who's on the voting comittee licoughlih3xlicoughli[/quotedb615237cb]

We're not going to say who's in the group, but h3x is not one of them.[/quotedb615237cb]

How would [idb615237cb]you[/idb615237cb] know, TSJ? As if you'd be invited on the COE.

EatChex89

21-11-2006 23:09:43

[quote5ceb11a958="ilanbg"][quote5ceb11a958="theysayjump"][quote5ceb11a958="EatChex89"]i guess we know who's on the voting comittee licoughlih3xlicoughli[/quote5ceb11a958]

We're not going to say who's in the group, but h3x is not one of them.[/quote5ceb11a958]

How would [i5ceb11a958]you[/i5ceb11a958] know, TSJ? As if you'd be invited on the COE.[/quote5ceb11a958]

TSJ is not the invited, he's the invitee... no, wait. inviter

Tholek

21-11-2006 23:20:36

I'm not sure being an elder is all it's cracked up to be.

http//www.llrib.ca/elders.php

theysayjump

21-11-2006 23:26:00

[quote659b86c2a6="Tholek"]I'm not sure being an elder is all it's cracked up to be.

http//www.llrib.ca/elders.php[/quote659b86c2a6]

Dammit dmorris68, you were supposed to only put the Ratings System live. roll

Tholek

21-11-2006 23:29:06

Call him Myles, he's been here long enough...

hehehhehe

21-11-2006 23:31:02

[quote846ba73a71="Tholek"]I'm not sure being an elder is all it's cracked up to be.

http//www.llrib.ca/elders.php[/quote846ba73a71]
lol

ajasax

22-11-2006 00:14:13

I like the rating system! Very good idea. Will especially help out noobs wink I do agree, however, that the graphic in the upper-right hand corner is a little obtrusive. I like h3x's idea for a ticker-type display as well as %ages. I also just noticed that the forums were divided up into score brackets. Are those dynamic (ie will adjust automatically as ratings come in, or is it more work for dmorris wink)

theysayjump

22-11-2006 00:37:37

More work for me actually, but it's only a case of clicking a button to move a forum up or move it down.

ilanbg

22-11-2006 00:39:04

And we all know that lazy fuck isn't going to want to do that.

rwgrier

22-11-2006 04:03:23

Congrats! Looks good. )

I think rating systems like this.

WhyPayItsFree

22-11-2006 04:28:28

Congrats! Good system

But can that image be removed from top right . Due to that page becomes wide and scrollbar is there also..

KeithA

22-11-2006 05:27:02

[quote0f1e9e7bfe="rwgrier"]Congrats! Looks good. )

I think rating systems like this.[/quote0f1e9e7bfe]

Yes, we surveyed all the other rating systems, and their response was generally positive.

Stroid

22-11-2006 06:02:55

nice work guys although i dont really like the colors for the results but maybe thats just me

Nimh

22-11-2006 09:49:06

I'm also getting a bit annoyed with the side-scrolling. I'm finding it difficult to read when I have side-scroll for everything. I would imagine it could easily drive some people away from the site. I think you should definitely take down that giant picture and put in something more inconspicuous if you can (like h3x's idea, very nice). I don't even want to browse with that thing making everything so annoying.

dmorris68

22-11-2006 10:03:17

I will remove the top graphic. I didn't expect that very many people would have to side-scroll though -- isn't just about everybody running at least 1280x1024 nowadays? Geesh. I complain when I'm forced to run at less than 1600x1200, so I just don't see a side-scroll issue.

I'll look at the feasibility of something like h3x suggested, but I can't make any promises...

[bd801622578]Edit[/bd801622578] Admin beat me to it, just as I was typing that.

Admin

22-11-2006 10:10:05

[quoted97b96446e="dmorris68"]I will remove the top graphic. I didn't expect that very many people would have to side-scroll though -- isn't just about everybody running at least 1280x1024 nowadays? Geesh. I complain when I'm forced to run at less than 1600x1200, so I just don't see a side-scroll issue.

I'll look at the feasibility of something like h3x suggested, but I can't make any promises...[/quoted97b96446e]

beat ya to to the punch )

WhyPayItsFree

22-11-2006 10:16:19

You can place it at bottom or else make a vertical bar of that and place it on top..

Tholek

22-11-2006 13:10:08

LOL. I'm still at 1024x768. I just don't like to sit so close to the monitor. )

YourGiftsFree

22-11-2006 21:49:15

I didnt have to scroll at all. shrug

EatChex89

22-11-2006 22:13:08

i use 1024X768 on my lappy since that's the highest res it supports

but yeah it side scrolls on here, but not on my desktop WS comp.

Gigante

23-11-2006 09:39:55

If people had computers that ran more updated OS's than Windows 95 we wouldn't have had to remove it...

Nimh

23-11-2006 17:11:28

[quotec81c40b9d7="EatChex89"]i use 1024X768 on my lappy since that's the highest res it supports

but yeah it side scrolls on here, but not on my desktop WS comp.[/quotec81c40b9d7]

Yeah, same, that was my problem. Thanks.

Offer4All

23-11-2006 17:54:52

[quote9bf6dc0020="theysayjump"][quote9bf6dc0020="bruman"][quote9bf6dc0020="toebash"]123stuffforfree didn't pay for a forum -- the ones who pay for a forum are essentially making a 'security deposit' that says they won't bail on the users.[/quote9bf6dc0020]

I know that, but i'm saying they need to actually make an impact on the freebie scene in some way. If they had ratings for every single small site it would get overcrowded. Like FreeEnterprize, being less than a month old - way to young to be considered.[/quote9bf6dc0020]

There would be a distinct difference between new sites/networks being given their own forum and being a part of the Ratings System (RS).

We're discussing giving smaller sites their own forum in order to build up a reputation as well as offer news and support to the members who pursue their sites and then after a certain period of time and (hopefully) having established themselves as legit they'd be entered into the RS.

That's my idea anyway.[/quote9bf6dc0020]

GiftsInnovations has been out for 2 months, over $4,000 shipped. GiftXtent.com, as also been created. So, when can the netwrok be considered to have a forum? I believe you said 3 months?

dmorris68

25-11-2006 07:51:38

[b5ed45e7c0f]UPDATE[/b5ed45e7c0f] If you haven't noticed already, a scrolling ticker has been added to the page header under the nav menu. This replaces the ill-fated graphic that causes so many to scroll. Credit for the scrolling ticker idea goes to h3x, it sounded like a good compromise so I thought I'd give it a shot.

I'm sure some of you will find it annoying. P And for some of you it might not even display properly -- not only is the HTML MARQUEE tag not really HTML (it's a Microsoft proprietary "feature" that only recent browsers have started to simulate), but I had to do some creative sizing and DIV work to make it appear consistent between IE6 and Firefox. Please PM me or post here with any issues you see in the ticker.

If this approach doesn't work out, we'll back up and punt.

Oh, and I also removed the separate "Ratings" link from the nav menu since the ticker itself is clickable to reach the site ratings page.

BD2006BD

25-11-2006 08:13:48

I think it's a good idea, but I find it annoying.

WhyPayItsFree

25-11-2006 08:18:24

Scrollbar is there for me..

dmorris68

25-11-2006 08:25:29

[quote6d8f6c0a31="BD2006BD"]I think it's a good idea, but I find it annoying.[/quote6d8f6c0a31]
I figured some would, that's why the MARQUEE tag is all but verboten in web design circles. However it does have it's place in very specific circumstances, like a scrolling news/stock ticker.

If too many people complain of it being annoying/distracting, I may be able to play with colors or something to make it less noticeable. Or move it to the bottom of the page maybe.

So keep the ideas coming.

[quote6d8f6c0a31="g-argarwal"]Scrollbar is there for me..[/quote6d8f6c0a31]
Scrollbar? On a regular forum page, or on the site ratings page? I couldn't make a scrollbar appear on a forum page until I shrunk the page down to under 400px wide or so. The site ratings page has a wide table so the horizontal scroll will kick in sooner, can't do much about that.

And what browser version & OS are you running, and at what resolution? I was only able to test this with IE6 and Firefox 2.0 so far.

[b6d8f6c0a31]Edit[/b6d8f6c0a31] Or were you calling the scrolling text box up top a "scrollbar?" lol Scrollbar means something else entirely to me, and what I was trying to avoid, so you threw me there for a minute.

johnjimjones

25-11-2006 08:28:31

[quotef9c5aee51d="dmorris68"][bf9c5aee51d]UPDATE[/bf9c5aee51d] If you haven't noticed already, a scrolling ticker has been added to the page header under the nav menu. This replaces the ill-fated graphic that causes so many to scroll. Credit for the scrolling ticker idea goes to h3x, it sounded like a good compromise so I thought I'd give it a shot.

I'm sure some of you will find it annoying. P And for some of you it might not even display properly -- not only is the HTML MARQUEE tag not really HTML (it's a Microsoft proprietary "feature" that only recent browsers have started to simulate), but I had to do some creative sizing and DIV work to make it appear consistent between IE6 and Firefox. Please PM me or post here with any issues you see in the ticker.

If this approach doesn't work out, we'll back up and punt.

Oh, and I also removed the separate "Ratings" link from the nav menu since the ticker itself is clickable to reach the site ratings page.[/quotef9c5aee51d]

mad props for the scroll bar. tab bit annoying that it keeps reloading/starting over, but still sweet.

WhyPayItsFree

25-11-2006 09:22:33

Scroll bar is there on this page also. If I dont scroll I cant see the full post. I am using XP, Firefox 2.0 and 800x600.

Example If I dont scroll, I only see "Scrollbar? On a regular forum page, or on the site ratings page? I couldn't make a scrollbar appe" from your post.

dmorris68

25-11-2006 10:36:08

[quotedb8d9b2394="g-agarwal"]Scroll bar is there on this page also. If I dont scroll I cant see the full post. I am using XP, Firefox 2.0 and 800x600.

Example If I dont scroll, I only see "Scrollbar? On a regular forum page, or on the site ratings page? I couldn't make a scrollbar appe" from your post.[/quotedb8d9b2394]
800x600??? What, are you running on a 14" VGA monitor? shock

The index page seems to not require scrolling even at 800x600, so it isn't the ticker causing your scrolling, it's this specific thread, which has some signature images that are pretty wide. So you would almost certainly be scrolling WITHOUT the ticker at the top.

Almost every modern website is optimized for at least 1024x768. I'm thinking you have to be in the minority here running at that low a res, so I'm hesitant to make many adjustments unless there are more complaints. Sorry, but there's only so much design that can be done within such small constraints. (

dmorris68

25-11-2006 10:40:48

[quotefc291a0a24="johnjimjones"]mad props for the scroll bar. tab bit annoying that it keeps reloading/starting over, but still sweet.[/quotefc291a0a24]
Starting over? You'd rather it wouldn't? ? I thought that was pretty much the point of a scrolling ticker. )

I can configure it to loop as few or as many times as we want, if people only want to see it loop once or twice per page. But I think seeing an empty box up there after the last loop would be kinda goofy. No way around that without some hairy javascript timer coding to hide box afterwards.