Redesign Launch - Stage 2 in progress

[slippyguy]

In response to post #55732771.

Madrias wrote:

Well, I found out this much by accident, but for me at least, I've improved usability for myself with a simple little trick.

 

I reduced the zoom from 100% to 80%. Yeah, I know it's nothing special, but it did two things I didn't expect: It put the search bar next to the drop downs (something I'd asked for in my main list) and gave me some 'blank space' on either side of the main content (another thing that was on my list), so it's gone from 'barely tolerable' to 'mostly usable' at this point for me. Font sizes are a little small, but not unreadable, so it'll work for the time being.

 

I know not everyone can do this, but it works for me. I still think there's room for improvements, but it's not too bad at this point.

It put the search bar next to the drop downs (something I'd asked for in my main list)

I'd just like to mention that search bar is only put below the dropdowns if your horiziontal resolution is equal to or less than 1280px, which definitely sounds like something that should be addressed. There's ample room for the header to narrow farther, rather than waste more precious vertical space. Edited December 5, 2017 by slippyguy

[Thandal]

 

@GlassDeviant; Placing spoilers within spoilers within spoilers within a single post works fine for me.

 

 

 

Like this:

 

 

Nesting them doesn't appear to cause any issues.

 

 

I have been...somewhat moderate (relative to how I felt when posting) in my hopefully constructive criticism of the new site up until now, because I didn't want to be one of the people being ignored due to foaming at the mouth ranting and cussing, I wanted to contribute to making the new design (somehow) better, but what has happened today has completely blown my mind into tiny pieces.

 

After attempting to fix a problem where a forum post with more than two sets of spoiler tags does not display correctly in either the new mods site OR the OLD mods site, I have come to the conclusion that the developers of the Nexus either have a severe deficiency in their knowledge of how to code HTML properly, or they use code generating tools that produce obscene, bloated code and never examine the code for machine-generated issues (or don't know how to) to find and fix the sort of mistakes auto-generated code is invariably full of. Because that's what looks like happened here, I've seen it before countless times.

 

I opened the problematic post for the first time on the mods site and what confronted me made me want to vomit just a little. A text block consisting of many short lines of ini file entries had DIV TAGS ON NEARLY EVERY LINE INCLUDING LINE SPACING! What the heck? There should be ONE set of div tags with br tags or, at MOST, p tags to separate lines! Div tags are for DIVISION of blocks of text, not LINE SPACING!

 

I can't even begin to figure out what is wrong with the handling of more than two sets of spoiler tags in a post when the code for handling the text within posts is so badly written. Actually that's not true, I could do it, I've dealt with this sort of auto-generated junk before. What I can't do is look at this mess for long enough to get the job done.

 

(Edited for less vehemence and vitriol)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And multiple independent spoilers work as well:

 

 

 

This is another example.

 

 

 

Same on the new mod sites design. Tested by posting multiple spoilers in the comments for one of my own mods. :cool:

 

So maybe the specific post you looked at was corrupted by something else? :huh:

 

 

 

Ok first, it was not nested spoilers, it was three distinct and discrete, i.e.: top level, sets of spoiler tags.

 

Second, it occurs only in the third pair of spoiler tags.

 

Third, it appears only on the mod pages, not in the forums which display all of the tags properly.

 

Your example post did not exhibit the bug because you did not do three top level spoiler tags, you did two top level and one nested spoiler.

 

This behaviour is displayed on no less than five different browsers across three computers and a tablet, so there is no way that "something else", at least involving your implication that it is on the client end, could corrupt it since that same thing would have to exist on five different browsers, on four different devices, running three different operating systems.

 

As noted here: https://github.com/Nexus-Mods/web-issues/issues/411

 

You should be able to see it here, where it is at this moment still the first unstickied post on the mod page:

 

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/8889?tab=posts

 

 

Well, I'm running Win10/64-bit (v1709). With the current versions of FF, Chrome, Edge, and IE11, this post to one of my own mods, now with four sets of spoilers, (nested and otherwise) has no problem at all using either the old or the new layout.

 

So I stand by my initial supposition that there was something wrong with the particular post you're referring to, rather than a problem with the Nexus' code.

[Maarsz]

PLEASE bring back site backgrounds that change with the game, the current one makes it hard to tell at a glance which game it is.

[Madrias]

In response to post #55732771. #55749371 is also a reply to the same post.

Madrias wrote:

Well, I found out this much by accident, but for me at least, I've improved usability for myself with a simple little trick.

 

I reduced the zoom from 100% to 80%. Yeah, I know it's nothing special, but it did two things I didn't expect: It put the search bar next to the drop downs (something I'd asked for in my main list) and gave me some 'blank space' on either side of the main content (another thing that was on my list), so it's gone from 'barely tolerable' to 'mostly usable' at this point for me. Font sizes are a little small, but not unreadable, so it'll work for the time being.

 

I know not everyone can do this, but it works for me. I still think there's room for improvements, but it's not too bad at this point.

slippyguy wrote:

It put the search bar next to the drop downs (something I'd asked for in my main list)

I'd just like to mention that search bar is only put below the dropdowns if your horiziontal resolution is equal to or less than 1280px, which definitely sounds like something that should be addressed. There's ample room for the header to narrow farther, rather than waste more precious vertical space.

Yeah, that 1280 pixel wide limitation sounds like it adds up. I use a 1680x1050 monitor, but I intentionally leave any browser window at about 3/4 the screen width. I multitask a lot, so not consuming the entire screen width is kinda important to me. For now, the 80% zoom reduction works for me, but I agree, there's more than enough space to squeeze the dropdown bar and the search bar up into the same area. I'd even argue that it's a bit ridiculous having the search bar take up as much space as it does. After all, most searches are based around one or two words, so why is the search bar long enough to type a full sentence in?

I mean, at least the 80% zoom thing has made it very usable to me, and after a little while, the new layout kinda grows on you, I suppose. It's not "end of the world terrible" but there's room for at least some improvements. I mean, at this point, I'd even settle for just swapping News and Media so that I can get my site news without scrolling past the latest pictures of Skyrim characters in barely-any-clothing. It's nothing against the 'photographers' in the community, just looking at other people's screenshots isn't my cup of tea.

[Ruhadre]

In response to post #55747751. #55747886, #55748161 are all replies on the same post.

Ruhadre wrote: Ya know what really grinds my gears? The fact you guys are going through with this update to the site and IGNORING major things that would not only drastically improve site performance, but improve the quality of usage for the screenarcher community. What I speak of are limits that need to be established on posted image sets. Currently, screenarchers are capable of uploading TONS of back to back sets, effectively pushing the sets of less prolific posters out of the spotlight to be seen by others. Naturally, this has to have a huge drag on the site. It is my belief, as well as many others, that a time limit, and a daily number limit on uploaded sets would turn all of that around. For instance, only allow a set to be uploaded per user every 15 minutes. Allow for a maximum of like 10 sets a day. Just establishing those limits would also encourage screenarchers to produce quality over quantity, and many other screenarchers would get more exposure for their sets. I respectfully ask that you please consider these limits, if improving site performance is really the goal and not just a "new look".

Samulis wrote: I agree! Some sort of limitation would definitely be in order. Doesn't make much sense to me that users can spam the image section non stop when there is an option to include multiple images in the description anyways.

Ethreon wrote: One user can upload up to 5 images a day, or 15 with Premium. That's quite limiting already, and I see no point in limiting it anymore when you can filter images yourself by type.

Even with those limits, people spam sets with the intention of pushing other sets out of view. Who really uses a filter to look at images? I rarely have. I like to see what's new.

[Ethreon]

In response to post #55747751. #55747886, #55748161, #55753231 are all replies on the same post.

Ruhadre wrote: Ya know what really grinds my gears? The fact you guys are going through with this update to the site and IGNORING major things that would not only drastically improve site performance, but improve the quality of usage for the screenarcher community. What I speak of are limits that need to be established on posted image sets. Currently, screenarchers are capable of uploading TONS of back to back sets, effectively pushing the sets of less prolific posters out of the spotlight to be seen by others. Naturally, this has to have a huge drag on the site. It is my belief, as well as many others, that a time limit, and a daily number limit on uploaded sets would turn all of that around. For instance, only allow a set to be uploaded per user every 15 minutes. Allow for a maximum of like 10 sets a day. Just establishing those limits would also encourage screenarchers to produce quality over quantity, and many other screenarchers would get more exposure for their sets. I respectfully ask that you please consider these limits, if improving site performance is really the goal and not just a "new look".

Samulis wrote: I agree! Some sort of limitation would definitely be in order. Doesn't make much sense to me that users can spam the image section non stop when there is an option to include multiple images in the description anyways.

Ethreon wrote: One user can upload up to 5 images a day, or 15 with Premium. That's quite limiting already, and I see no point in limiting it anymore when you can filter images yourself by type.

Ruhadre wrote: Even with those limits, people spam sets with the intention of pushing other sets out of view. Who really uses a filter to look at images? I rarely have. I like to see what's new.

I stand by what I said - I find it unneeded. IF you're willing to sift thru the new content all together then you have to be willing to sift thru all the garbage for a few good images. Otherwise, filters. They're there to be used, and people use them if they need a specific result. They might not always work correctly since not everyone is a fan of correct tagging, but most times they'll do their job. Edited December 5, 2017 by Ethreon

[Shasariden]

It is very confusing, and sort of difficult to see anything, with all the images being so hugely sized. Is there a place to provide feedback? I would like to leave a proper opinion about the new look.

[Ethreon]

In response to post #55754811.

Shasariden wrote: It is very confusing, and sort of difficult to see anything, with all the images being so hugely sized. Is there a place to provide feedback? I would like to leave a proper opinion about the new look.

https://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/topic/6187673-new-design-constructive-feedback/page-15#entry55754296

[kojak747]

I've been trying oh so hard to love the new site but I just can't - So I changed all my links/favourites etc to point to the old domain and there is no doubt about it, I browse the old site much quicker and far more efficiently than the new site. It comes down to being able to glance at the page and get the pertinent info. The new site maybe offer the same information but its so bogged down by all the other text vying for your attention. So I'm sticking with the old site for as long as possible.

[SyddSpartan]

In response to post #55747751. #55747886, #55748161, #55753231, #55754396 are all replies on the same post.

Ruhadre wrote: Ya know what really grinds my gears? The fact you guys are going through with this update to the site and IGNORING major things that would not only drastically improve site performance, but improve the quality of usage for the screenarcher community. What I speak of are limits that need to be established on posted image sets. Currently, screenarchers are capable of uploading TONS of back to back sets, effectively pushing the sets of less prolific posters out of the spotlight to be seen by others. Naturally, this has to have a huge drag on the site. It is my belief, as well as many others, that a time limit, and a daily number limit on uploaded sets would turn all of that around. For instance, only allow a set to be uploaded per user every 15 minutes. Allow for a maximum of like 10 sets a day. Just establishing those limits would also encourage screenarchers to produce quality over quantity, and many other screenarchers would get more exposure for their sets. I respectfully ask that you please consider these limits, if improving site performance is really the goal and not just a "new look".

Samulis wrote: I agree! Some sort of limitation would definitely be in order. Doesn't make much sense to me that users can spam the image section non stop when there is an option to include multiple images in the description anyways.

Ethreon wrote: One user can upload up to 5 images a day, or 15 with Premium. That's quite limiting already, and I see no point in limiting it anymore when you can filter images yourself by type.

Ruhadre wrote: Even with those limits, people spam sets with the intention of pushing other sets out of view. Who really uses a filter to look at images? I rarely have. I like to see what's new.

Ethreon wrote: I stand by what I said - I find it unneeded. IF you're willing to sift thru the new content all together then you have to be willing to sift thru all the garbage for a few good images. Otherwise, filters. They're there to be used, and people use them if they need a specific result. They might not always work correctly since not everyone is a fan of correct tagging, but most times they'll do their job.

Filtering isn't specific enough to warrant for what you're proposing to be effective. If I have the ability to filter by user like how Flickr does it so I can choose how many images per user can be displayed, its cool.

Otherwise, what Rory and Sam suggest are the best bets. Besides.. 15 images for one person with premium is downright nuts. It needs to be limited with a time penalty. It isn't exactly fair for a new user to post an image only to be lost under some dude posting his character with quadruple D breasts. I see the pro's of limiting a user's upload to be far better than just pretending that spamming isn't an issue.