|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events In the News Military.com's forced "dumb-down" of the Discussion Groups Topic Closed|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Experienced Member |
Well, that sux.. I got on this site while I was off on medical leave.. I'm gonna miss ya buddy... |
|||
|
Highly Experienced Member |
Goes like this mil.com!
If it ain't broke don't fix it! Old Navy saying! |
|||
|
|
Now OldArmyLOVE -------------------  Founding Member ------------------- |
That would be sad for all concerned! A listening ear, a caring heart, an open mind and an extend hand may be all I can offer, but they are yours without charge or judgment. |
|||
|
|
Now OldArmyLOVE ------------------- Founding Member ------------------- |
I’m so happy to hear she is doing better. You would be missed. I joined for the same reason. My wife got a little worse and I had to step aside for a while. Now she is better and I still loved this forum the way it was. A listening ear, a caring heart, an open mind and an extend hand may be all I can offer, but they are yours without charge or judgment. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Good about wellness shame if leaving. If'n ya ever need a cussin just drop a line and say so with some opinion that I can pretend is in groups and be disagreeable as I can work myself up to. |
|||
|
Rammer Jammer Yellow Hammer |
'Suck it up and drive on'. Old Army saying. Just kidding you, couldn't resist.  |
|||
|
|
Member |
I'm a newby, so I'm not sure what I'm missing with "dumbing-down". |
|||
|
|
Forums Administrator THE ROBOCOP  |
Greetings everyone,
Thanks for opening up a discussion on this, the home office gurus do want to hear your opinions. So... let's take a deep breath for a moment, and I'll offer some information and answer any questions that I can about what's going on. First, about the news: The discussion feature attached to a particular news article can now be done directly with the news article. It is not different in any way, except that it looks different. You can still post your comments or discussions as before, but without having to link outside the page. Some of you more experienced users know that sometimes we'll get two or three or four threads going about the same news story, because someone did not know that a thread was already in progress. Also, some folks got lost from time to time, during the re-directing out of the article and into the forum. This was a pain in the neck for everyone. But now, this problem is no more. So please continue to post as usual without the troubles of the past. This new feature will keep us all on the same page (figuratively and literally). For now, there will be a link to the old way of doig things (that brings you to the In The News forum). But this is to give everyone a chance to get used to the new system. Believe me, once you see that you don't have to re-direct or get lost between duplicat threads, you will notice the convenience and possitive difference. Like I said before, the discussions can carry on in exactly the same way... it just look different. And, since everyone can read the article and post comments and discussions directly, there will be more folks there who can and will participate. Ok... post any questions that you may have. If I have the answer, I'll give it honestly. If I don't have the answer, I'll find the person who does. Thanks! -Rob "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
OK -
First, the "new" format is not only unfamiliar but offers few, if any, of the little bennies (emoticons, block user, editing features etc) that are present with ITN threads ... and the comment print is small and difficult for us half-blind old farts and fartesses. Second, what happens to a news article, for example yesterday's "Dempsey To Succeed Fallon at CentCom" when it falls off the front page news (as it already has) and out of the "Most Popular" which it is about to do? It seems to me that long running threads will become a thing of the past ... not a good thing in my view since it discourages depth of discourse. Now, what I anticipate happening, at least to some degree, is that those of us wedded to ITN will find the original source for stories posted on the front page ... and start our own threads on ITN (as long as that capability is left untouched). That will split respondents between the front page article and ITN ... not good. I speak only for myself and without anger but perhaps with a bit of disappointment in saying that if the new format continues ... and ITN goes by the wayside, so will I. The flame will no longer be worth the candle. Edited to add: The argument about duplicate threads is a bit specious. If someone opens a thread on a subject on ITN and the military.com editorial staff opens a story on the front page, there are still duplicate threads ... in different places with a divided constituency. I'd prefer to see military.com revert to the old format but have the editorial staff open the "join the discussion" thread (on ITN) at the same time they post the story on the front page ... admittedly one extra step for them but it would ensure a decent title for the thread (and help discourage duplicate posts). It would add about a minute to the military.com editor's time per story. This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jade_Gate, |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Rob, you seem like a smart & dedicated guy ... so it is dismaying to see you "cherry-picking" your answer. I especially had a problem with two things you said: The evades the points that folks may not *want* to be all on the same page, and that in fact, it might be bad for the troops for everyone to be "kept on the same page." To consider just one example, it often happens that the forum are *way* ahead of the curve when it comes to news, relative to military.com, and even relative to the wire services and the DoD. The old way provided (at least) an indirect link to these super-timely discussions. The new way doesn't. So this is a change clearly for the worse as far as the welfare of the troops is concerned. The point being, our troops require an informed citizenry that does not wait for -- or even tolerate -- media that passively "keeps them on the same page."  I also had a problem with: Just to point out, no one "noticed the convenience and positive difference". Instead the military.com's main posters unanimously hated it. May I respectfully suggest, that the above considerations be given higher priority. Which means, go back to the old way -- hold (and archive) the discussions in the public forums. Is the old way a "pain in the neck"? Yes. Necessarily so. Because workings of democracy *are* a pain in the neck. So when you diminish that pain, you diminish the main glory of democracy. Semper Fi!  |
|||
|
|
Forums Administrator THE ROBOCOP |
Thanks Jade! This is a good start.
I will email the tech-gurus about the small print, emoticons, etc. As for what happens to a news article: It remains on the site just as before. All the stories do. Just click on the "News" tab and the story will be in it's appropriate category: http://www.military.com/news/article/new-central-comman...ief-an-army-man.html The sotry will be available for as much depth of discourse as you wish. The link to the old ITN forum will eventually go away (I'm sorry to say). But it is up there for now so that everyone has a chance to look around. So eventually, duplicates will be a thing of the past. By the way... we do have a "help & feedback" email that goes directly to the member services office. You can find a link to it at the bottom of any page. http://www.military.com/Content/Help/HelpEmailForm "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
You seem to think this is good news. With respect, it is horrible in every way. It may be good for military.com's advertisers, but it is bad for the troops. Why is military.com failing to take this into account? |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
I second USMC_Family's comment on Rob's point above. I am one of those that don't want to be "on the same page" ... particularly not a page exclusively made up of one editorial staff's selections. Nothing against military.com's staff but if I wanted a sole venue's pre-screening of what I was to read, I'd subscribe to an on-line newspaper. The thing that has made ITN popular is, dare I say it, the diversity of threads that are posted by a an eclectic group of posters. |
|||
|
|
Forums Administrator THE ROBOCOP |
Ok.. I'll pass this along to the gurus (without the personal jabs). But a couple of old sayings come to my mind: "you can't stop progress" [and] "that which stagnates, rots". Military.com is dedicated to exploring and bringing to all members the lates of what's available. The old way may seem 'better' now, because it's familiar; but in due time and given a fair chance, you just may like it. Do you see our men & women in the fron lines still using the old M-1 rifles? "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Not to belabor the point but that is fundamentally useless to discussion. Unlike ITN, where, should I post on an old thread, it rises to the top of the heap so people realize there is a new comment, that does not happen with news stories that have attritted from the front page. When it drops off the front page, it is essentially ... dead and gone. The analogy you used with USMC Family is, IMHO, backwards. The front page format military.com has gone to has been around for ages. In my view, this change represents a regression, not progress. You've replaced the M-16 with a black powder muzzle loader. |
|||
|
|
Forums Administrator THE ROBOCOP |
I see what you mean about this one. I have sent an email out so that key staff will be directed to this thread and see the discussion first-hand, instead of me gathering and re-sending these issues to them. So please keep these detailed messages coming. And remember that you get more bees with honey than with trash.  "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
With respect, please forward my post without editing it. I can speak for myself, thank you. Rob, I am confident that your post's reasoning accurately reflects the thinking of higher-ups at military.com. So if they recognize themselves, that's good. And therefore, please forward this post, too! |
|||
|
|
Forums Administrator THE ROBOCOP |
John, Please see my post above. "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Did you get PR training from M$ regarding what you call a feature? From what I see there will be no more notification of new posts to a thread one finds interesting to follow. I suppose there will not be danger of threads running on for multiple pages since people are sure to lose interest for sake of the new format. I suppose everyone will have incentive to get their post right the first time since there is not means to make corrections. The new feature of not including quotes ought to save much bandwidth since it will quickly become lost who someone responds to. But I suppose the confusion should be minimized by fact there will be fewer readers and posters. I bet there are a number of people who will be offended to read how stupid you think they are that you really believe they will believe your BS about anything of the change to be wonderful new features. I think you are going to find there be a lot of Judge Judy fans that whatever else they migbht disagree they will come together on the idea, "Don't piss on my leg and tell me it is raining." |
|||
|
|
suspended 90 days as of 5/19/09 |
What's the big whoop? This format is used in lots of other news sites, leaving a comment is nothing new. You can always use the 'Sound off in Discussion Forums' link at the bottom.
Advertising? I only see blurbs for Ghengiz Khan, a University and the Mil.com header. At least you're not getting dumped into advertising sites with automatically opening windows, as happens elsewhere. Advertising stops us having to pay-up. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 3 4 5 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Topic Closed Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events In the News Military.com's forced "dumb-down" of the Discussion Groups
