| Author |
 Topic  |
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
 Posted - 11/01/2009 : 01:58:33
|
Yes, there's still quite a bit of graphics work to be done/ tidied up. In fact, what I should probably stress is that how the site looks is largely irrelevant at this stage- the majority of my time has been spent writing the new fwfr in such a way that it could be changed graphically without too much work (even on a film by film basis if need be).
Right now, I mostly wanted to show you how it's looking at the moment (and to prove I've not just been kicking back drinking mojitos for the last year). Hopefully, once I get something up and running that you can all play around with, you'll get a much better feel for what you like or don't- that'll also be a better time to say what needs changing visually.
Still, thanks for all the comments so far- I'm really trying to take them on board as best I can at this stage. |
 |
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
|
|
bife 
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
|
|
[matt] 
"Cinemattic."
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 13:03:19
|
Cheers for the feedback benj 
|
|
|
|
Josh the cat
"ice wouldn't melt, you'd think ....."
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 13:41:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Hmm... some of those are mighty obscure and I'm not entirely sure half of them would fit. Is everyone really interested in knowing all these?
I'm not interested in some, but the accolades completed is certainly worth knowing. I also like the accolades created and possibly films added, but, like whipper(I think it was whipper) I would not like to think this become competitive. The only reason I have added so many is generally accolade creation.
10sh the cat |
Edited by - Josh the cat on 11/01/2009 13:42:20 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:06:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Still, if it's making all-time top reviews more visible that's a concern, these reviews already appear first against films so I'm not imagining removing rosettes will make a massive difference to visibility.
They only come first by one of ten possible orderings, and one of eight on reviewers' pages
quote:
Regarding iPhone and voting, the eventual aim will be to make a version of the site specially for that, but obviously I need to get this new version up and running first though.
As one of the main people who accesses the site on the iPhone (almost entirely until a couple of months ago), I'm really keen on the form of the site being the same. I don't want to have to learn two different ways of manoeuvring around. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:08:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
I agree that the top 100 has become a closed club, however, it seems unfair to penalise them because they have been so successful.
Not highlighting them more than they already are is hardly 'penalising' them. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:10:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
highlight all the reviews by the person who added the film?
This would benefit calmer, Josh and myself the most, but I'm against it. However, I wouldn't mind being able to read on the page who added the film. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:19:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by lamhasuas
I'd be reluctant to encourage adding dozens of obscure, never-to-be-reviewed films wholesale
Well, it wouldn't do that, as reviews could only be highlighted if they existed... |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 11/07/2009 18:58:12 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:22:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by S10n
I don't have an issue with rosettes for Top 500 reviews. That way, however a page is sorted, the top reviews stand out.
I guess the point is that if people sort pages in any of the nine other ways, then what they are not looking for is the highest reviews.
quote:
At present, user icons get greater visibility as a reward for quantity, and I think it's only fair for greater visibility to be the reward for high quality reviews.
Arguing it that way makes sense. I'd like the icons to be removed from reviews in fact. They could just appear on users' pages and in lists. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:29:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Josh_the_cat
Alot of the lists that Salopian created are, whilst valid, out of order and incomplete are you going to incorporate these and therefore formalise them
Well, they're not that bad, as I do update them periodically, but it would be nice to have them a proper part of the site, especially as the names could then be hyperlinked. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 11/07/2009 19:00:08 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 18:53:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by [matt]
On the current site it points to the reviewer as if they're actually saying it which is nice.
I'd never thought of this before but it's a good point.
quote:
And wouldn't it be better to have the default 'sort by chronological order' be oldest to newest rather than newest to oldest?
I'd also far prefer chronological to antichronological, but at least antichronological has some function. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 11/07/2009 18:59:30 |
|
|
|
ci�nas
"hands down"
|
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 01:55:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sa10pian
quote:
Originally posted by lamhasuas
I'd be reluctant to encourage adding dozens of obscure, never-to-be-reviewed films wholesale
Well, it wouldn't do that, as reviews could only be highlighted if they existed...
We seem to be at cross purposes. I didn�t mention reviews. I simply said that I�d like there to be some low-key acknowledgement given to whoever adds each individual film to the site (amid the film�s details would be the obvious place) � provided this didn�t encourage people to add rafts of random films that are unlikely ever to be reviewed. Adding films that you haven�t submitted a review for &/or that aren�t components of accolades strikes me as pointless.
____________________________________________________________________
Has anyone mentioned an undo option? Probably. Anyway, having just inadvertently rated a film I haven�t seen or even previously heard of, I�d be in favour of this. And how about a function that allows you to retract submitted reviews, prior to their acceptance or rejection, that you�re having second thoughts about, instead of merely having the ability to amend or delete them? If it�s an easy thing to set up it would be useful, I think, given the 20-films-per-week cap.
I was also wondering whether it would be possible to link films here directly with films on IMDb. This would speed up the process of trying to understand reviews of films you know little or nothing about.
|
Edited by - ci�nas on 11/09/2009 02:27:13 |
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 08:59:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by lamhasuas
Has anyone mentioned an undo option? Probably. Anyway, having just inadvertently rated a film I haven�t seen or even previously heard of, I�d be in favour of this. And how about a function that allows you to retract submitted reviews, prior to their acceptance or rejection, that you�re having second thoughts about, instead of merely having the ability to amend or delete them? If it�s an easy thing to set up it would be useful, I think, given the 20-films-per-week cap.
I was also wondering whether it would be possible to link films here directly with films on IMDb. This would speed up the process of trying to understand reviews of films you know little or nothing about.
Are you taking the mickey or are those real questions? If the former, fool on me for responding! If the latter, two of the requested functions exist already:
imdb link is the "imdb button" on the top left of every review page
scoring for films can be cancelled by clicking on the red 'x' that appears next to the film rating once you've rated it
Not sure what the benefit of 'retracting' a review would be above deleting it. Pretty sure deleting a review within the week removes it from counting towarsds the cap, but it's been years since the cap affected me so maybe I am missing some understanding.
The ability to take back a vote would be nice, as I've 'accidentally' voted for a review plenty of times (fat finger syndrome!); although that could also get personal! |
Edited by - bife on 11/09/2009 09:02:02 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 09:16:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by lamhasuas
We seem to be at cross purposes. I didn�t mention reviews. I simply said that I�d like there to be some low-key acknowledgement given to whoever adds each individual film to the site (amid the film�s details would be the obvious place) � provided this didn�t encourage people to add rafts of random films that are unlikely ever to be reviewed. Adding films that you haven�t submitted a review for &/or that aren�t components of accolades strikes me as pointles.
No, you did mention (lack of) reviews, as in "never-to-be-reviewed films". My point was that highlighting the adder's reviews would not encourage never-to-be-reviewed films, because the adder would obviously only get anything highlighted if they did review the film.
However, as I said, I agree that a small acknowledgment would be better. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 11/09/2009 09:16:49 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
10th Anniversary!!!
