Hey everyone, we are looking to have the site completely redesigned in the coming months and would like to get as many suggestions as possible as to what everyone would like to see.  We'd like to hear all suggestions, and will try to incorporate a large number of them into the final design. 

Also, if anyone has had prior experience with an affordable design person or business, let us know!  A few users have suggested moving the forum to Vbulletin software?!?

Are you talking just the forum, or the actual website too?

And personally, I'm not a fan of vBulletin. This is only coming from the user side of it, and not the administrator, but a few other forums I belong to use it and I like SMF so much better.

 

And if you were to redesign the website also, I'm thinking a cms (content management system) like Drupal or Wordpress is the way to go for a site like this.

It would be a total site overhaul, actual site and forum.  I'm not so sure we will go the CMS route, if we stick with SMF we'll probably use SSI to integrate the two.  I'm not sure if vBulletin has the same ability.

i frequent a site that recently left vBulletin 3 and they did that because of the number of issues they experienced in the last few months and the discussions they had with other people that went to the newest vBulletin software and were very unhappy.

 

I guess they were experiencing more attacks in the last 14 months than they had in the previous 15 years (yes, it's an old board)

i think the chat box could be interesting, if you could hide it if you want or if you could choose a certain user to chat with. It would be quicker and more efficient then messaging in certain cases. Plus people could battle out their arguments on that privately instead of on the forum. I guess kind of like the facebook chat. I dont know if that possible or not, just an idea.

I like the blue. Keep the blue.

I like the blue too!

The chatbox is fun!  I want that to come back!

 

 

I like forums where you can give someone reputation and feedback without dm'ing them or replying to a thread. :)

So basically, a chatbox.

I like forums where you can give someone reputation and feedback without dm'ing them or replying to a thread. :)

 

agreed.  like the crackberry forum.

The chatbox is fun! I want that to come back!

 

 

There will be something similar to the chatbox with the update.

I think it's great as is. The color scheme is nice and I'm not much of a fan of comment ratings.  Mostly I'd update the overall aesthetic theme so it feels a little more modern.

 

I'm not familiar with many other forums though so I don't know what I'm missing.

It would be great to link the photo galleries to a map, but I know that is pretty involved.

I use the Babylon layout - will there be something similar after the redesign?

I'm pretty content with the layout as is (old blue), so as long as I can maintain that, do watcha gotta do. I like the chatbox, but I'm afraid it will erode what little productivity my employer gets out of me.

I wouldn't jump ship from SMF. They seem to have gotten their stuff back in order, and maybe will get a production schedule that is good for webmasters. VBulletin costs money, and SMF with the right modifications can do the same stuff VBulletin can. Hell, with the SSI functions, you can do pretty much anything. It's amazing what global variables are at your use if you simply include SSI.php.

 

Personally, I would like to see an integration between the forum and the site. Right now they seem disconnected from each other.

I like it as is.  But I rarely cheat on UO... so I don't really have much to compare with.  I do wish there was a +1 feature which would allow you to indicate your agreement with a particular post.  Just something at the bottom of each post where it would say something like "the following forumers agree with this post."  You could even allow guests to indicate their agreement without giving them posting privileges.  It seems silly that I have to make a new post simply saying "agreed" if that is all I want to communicate.  But I wouldn't expand the option beyond indicating unequivocal agreement.

I used to operate a couple forums, and have tried phpBB, vBulletin, and SMF.  I always liked SMF the best, and I think it works well for UrbanOhio.  IMO, it's simple and elegant.  It gives you the tools you need, looks nice, but then gets out of your way.  It feels to me like some of those other systems try too hard and become distracting to what's important: the content.  Also, I personally cannot stand the karma points and per post feedback some other boards have in place.  It just seems to further fuel arguments and cliquishness.

 

My suggestion is to upgrade the forum to the latest version of SMF (2.0 RC4 I believe).  The website can be dealt with separately as mentioned above.

I use the Babylon layout - will there be something similar after the redesign?

 

Yes Babylon should be available.

Currently, I'm thinking we'll stay with SMF.  It has worked just fine since our migration from phpbb many many years ago, why start paying now?!?

Fine with me. :-)

Couple of questions:  What's the overall goal of the site redesign?  Are you trying to attract more visitors, add functionality for existing users, or both?

 

I think the forums are both well frequented and well designed from a users point of view, but could always use a few tweaks, like others have suggested.  I do believe the front page could use a shift in direction if there is intention to attract more and returning viewers & participants.

 

Take some time to consider a wordpress site for the front page.  There are a lot of people like me that follow RSS feeds and return to sites with interesting articles and regular or semi-regular updates.

 

There was a site that I used to follow called "BloggingOhio" that had really interesting UrbanOhio-esque type stories about Ohio architecture, art, events, history, life etc.  It's frozen in time (2007) at www.bloggingohio.com.  The site must not have made enough money for AOL to keep it active.

 

Implementing this type of site without paid labor is the difficult part.  One way would be to have volunteers (likely forum regulars) submit articles that are posted only when central editors (likely forum moderators) approve them (or at least approve the ones that fit the mission of the site).  The daily activity on the forum seems to support this kind of arrangement.

 

I think this type of site could draw a wider audience that may be looking for interesting local information, but are unable/unwilling to sort through the forum posts.

 

Good luck with the site redesign, no mater what direction you go.

I personally would like to add functionality for existing users more so than trying to attract more visitors.  At the same time, more users would be nice!  I would love to integrate the forum and the site completely but there aren't any bridges officially supported by SMF that I am aware of.  This leaves us the option for SSI integration only at this point unless we find a bridge and possibly a CMS that would work. 

 

Your suggestion of having users submit articles to be posted is an excellent idea, surely something we all can benefit from.  Thank you for your suggestions...keep them coming!

Posting the link to UO galleries as a sticky in the Photography section, as you did this morning, is a really good idea. I think that addresses a big part of the site integration issue.

Take some time to consider a wordpress site for the front page.  There are a lot of people like me that follow RSS feeds and return to sites with interesting articles and regular or semi-regular updates.

 

There was a site that I used to follow called "BloggingOhio" that had really interesting UrbanOhio-esque type stories about Ohio architecture, art, events, history, life etc.  It's frozen in time (2007) at www.bloggingohio.com.  The site must not have made enough money for AOL to keep it active.

 

Implementing this type of site without paid labor is the difficult part.  One way would be to have volunteers (likely forum regulars) submit articles that are posted only when central editors (likely forum moderators) approve them (or at least approve the ones that fit the mission of the site).  The daily activity on the forum seems to support this kind of arrangement.

 

I think this type of site could draw a wider audience that may be looking for interesting local information, but are unable/unwilling to sort through the forum posts.

 

I think the problem is that there are no bloggers.  The wealth of information of UrbanOhio is its forumers.

 

Running the main site as a blog would require hiring bloggers (or finding volunteers) to write the blogs, or to have people collect articles, well-written posts with context, etc. and compile them into blog entries.  I think you could spend a fair amount of money and still end up with a blog not as informative (but, yes, maybe cleaner and more concise) than the forums themselves.  It would be a large investment (in money, time, or both), and I am not sure you'd attract many more viewers (I think there are already many people who read the forums here and rarely if ever post, and likely a fair amount who are not even registered).

 

When I started coming to this site, I found the home page to only be useful as a way to view photos organized geographically.  However, I quickly realized the "revisit value" in the site was in the forums, and I've rarely used the main site since.  That is why I feel like putting too much effort into the main site (other than maybe enhancing the photo galleries and linking them to photo threads in the forum) would be a waste of effort.

Keep the "Recent Forum Topics" on the main page.  I use this MUCH more than actually exploring the boards.

The main site and the forum serve two different purposes.  The main site is to get people familiar with Ohio's cities, towns, and landscapes.  The forum answers questions and thus discussion.  If anything, the main site is in need of more effort and the forum basically sells itself with an SMF makeover.  Really, this forum wouldn't even be here if I weren't jealous of SSP ;).

The main site and the forum serve two different purposes.  The main site is to get people familiar with Ohio's cities, towns, and landscapes.  The forum answers questions and thus discussion.  If anything, the main site is in need of more effort and the forum basically sells itself with an SMF makeover.  Really, this forum wouldn't even be here if I weren't jealous of SSP ;).

 

My point, though, IS that the forum sells itself, whereas the site still wouldn't have much added value unless a lot of time and energy was put into it.  That's why I think a simple forum upgrade would suffice.

 

There's a reason blogs like Blogging Ohio couldn't stay in business.  It's hard to produce quality content on a niche subject and stay in business in a blog format unless you have a few really dedicated (and educated) volunteers since there's usually not much of a source of revenue.  It's really only possible to do with community content, such as a Wiki or a forum.

 

Come to think of it, maybe an UrbanOhio Wiki wouldn't be such a bad idea to make the "important information" more accessible than it is on the forum.

My point, though, IS that the forum sells itself, whereas the site still wouldn't have much added value unless a lot of time and energy was put into it.  That's why I think a simple forum upgrade would suffice.

 

That's kinda why we have this thread.  We want imput on how to improve the main site (and yes, the forum, but not so much that).  I initially liked the wiki idea before (someone else mentioned it to me in passing) but then thought of it as "well, Wikipedia does that already."

^ that's true, but wikipedia is only as good as the people who contribute to it. I think you'd have a lot more content, and a lot more detail in that content, relating to Ohio, if you created an Ohio based wiki.

Perhaps.  That could be very well integrated into a new site with a photo gallery per entry, blah blah, but I wouldn't want a "wiki"-look, if you catch my drift.  I would view it more as a good-old-fashioned-aesthetically-pleasing encyclopedia :D.

Perhaps. That could be very well integrated into a new site with a photo gallery per entry, blah blah, but I wouldn't want a "wiki"-look, if you catch my drift. I would view it more as a good-old-fashioned-aesthetically-pleasing encyclopedia :D.

 

I like it, and every member that signs on as a supporting member gets a full set of the print edition. Signed by you, of course.

Sometimes, I just hate you :(.

As long as you keep loving Cleveland...

Which may be short-term the way you're goin'!  :x

Lawd.

Perhaps.  That could be very well integrated into a new site with a photo gallery per entry, blah blah, but I wouldn't want a "wiki"-look, if you catch my drift.  I would view it more as a good-old-fashioned-aesthetically-pleasing encyclopedia :D.

 

I agree with that.  I don't care for the standard Wiki look, and I have no idea why more Wikis can't improve their look.

 

As far as "Wikipedia already does that", I tend to think about many Wikis that way, too, but I have seen many other "specialty Wikis" that serve a good purpose (I think Wikipedia likes to not get too specialized).  Besides, the Wiki would already basically just be a "best of the forums" collection, so it's really just serving the purpose of being a less-daunting place for casual visitors to get information, and having to navigate the whole of Wikipedia would pretty much defeat that purpose.

 

Really, when I say Wiki, I just mean a site that is able to be edited by many people.  A CMS could probably give you similar capabilities, but the nice thing about Wikis is the ability to standardize look-and-feel, "easier" syntax than HTML, and built-in security and versioning tools.  (Personally, I wouldn't mind it just being done through a CMS, but then you might not get as much community involvement in keeping it up-to-date.)

Should UO be turned Wikileaks style where we encourage people to steal confidential information from local government and private companies?

 

(I don't really understand what Wiki means or why it's called wikileaks)

(I don't really understand what Wiki means or why it's called wikileaks)

 

What better place to find out than Wikipedia? :)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki

Perhaps. That could be very well integrated into a new site with a photo gallery per entry, blah blah, but I wouldn't want a "wiki"-look, if you catch my drift. I would view it more as a good-old-fashioned-aesthetically-pleasing encyclopedia :D.

 

I agree with that. I don't care for the standard Wiki look, and I have no idea why more Wikis can't improve their look.

 

As far as "Wikipedia already does that", I tend to think about many Wikis that way, too, but I have seen many other "specialty Wikis" that serve a good purpose (I think Wikipedia likes to not get too specialized). Besides, the Wiki would already basically just be a "best of the forums" collection, so it's really just serving the purpose of being a less-daunting place for casual visitors to get information, and having to navigate the whole of Wikipedia would pretty much defeat that purpose.

 

Really, when I say Wiki, I just mean a site that is able to be edited by many people. A CMS could probably give you similar capabilities, but the nice thing about Wikis is the ability to standardize look-and-feel, "easier" syntax than HTML, and built-in security and versioning tools. (Personally, I wouldn't mind it just being done through a CMS, but then you might not get as much community involvement in keeping it up-to-date.)

 

I totally agree.  I figured that's what you meant but I wasn't sure if you literally meant "wiki" or the idea.

Jam40jeff brings up some interesting counterpoints about a group blogging site.  I suggest that there is a very different audience for front page articles vs. forum logs, and adding articles to the front page would have the potential to bring in new and returning community members.

 

I found some good information on Community Blogging that discusses the startup of the "Chicagoist" website that still uses volunteers to post articles.

http://www.webraw.com/quixtar/archives/2006/01/blogging_101_community_blogging.php

http://chicagoist.com/

 

I'll also add that there are quite a few forum posts on UO that read like short articles already.  One of UO's greatest assets is the diverse community members and this might be one way to leverage our knowledge and desire to create.  Anyway, all this is just one suggestion to consider as you re-tool the site, and I agree with Jam40Jeff that it would take some effort to implement.  Keep up the good work in any case, I really enjoy UO.

 

On the wiki subject, I'm not a big fan of them myself, but I thought I'd offer Case Wiki as an example of one:

http://wiki.case.edu/Main_Page

I love the wiki idea, but the implementation is something I imagine would be daunting, and the upkeep even moreseo. Would you allow editing by the entire community, like wikipedia does, or would only a few people (like mods) be given the ability. Either way, there's a lot of work you're going to be putting on the mods, either as the primary editors, or as the people who oversee the edits / entries. You guys already have your hands full monitoring the forums. It might be a lot to ask to take on this project as well, for a volunteer group. (I mean, following around and erasing MTS' posts of "Shaker Square Rules" and Miranda Priestly pictures in every entry would be a full time job itself).

I love the wiki idea, but the implementation is something I imagine would be daunting, and the upkeep even moreseo. Would you allow editing by the entire community, like wikipedia does, or would only a few people (like mods) be given the ability. Either way, there's a lot of work you're going to be putting on the mods, either as the primary editors, or as the people who oversee the edits / entries. You guys already have your hands full monitoring the forums. It might be a lot to ask to take on this project as well, for a volunteer group. (I mean, following around and erasing MTS' posts of "Shaker Square Rules" and Miranda Priestly pictures in every entry would be a full time job itself).

 

Just one little request. This may be my own issue with settings or my browser but it would be nice to have a lateral scroll ability particularly for the photo threads. If a thread is posted with slightly oversized photos I have to go to the bottom of the post to scroll over to see the other half of the photo, then scroll back up to see the remainder of the picture; kind of a pain. I don't have the issue when visiting SSP which has a similar set up but does include a lateral scroll. Does that make sense?

Just one little request. This may be my own issue with settings or my browser but it would be nice to have a lateral scroll ability particularly for the photo threads. If a thread is posted with slightly oversized photos I have to go to the bottom of the post to scroll over to see the other half of the photo, then scroll back up to see the remainder of the picture; kind of a pain. I don't have the issue when visiting SSP which has a similar set up but does include a lateral scroll. Does that make sense?

 

Im using google chrome for my mac and i dont have that problem. Try getting Chrome

Just one little request. This may be my own issue with settings or my browser but it would be nice to have a lateral scroll ability particularly for the photo threads. If a thread is posted with slightly oversized photos I have to go to the bottom of the post to scroll over to see the other half of the photo, then scroll back up to see the remainder of the picture; kind of a pain. I don't have the issue when visiting SSP which has a similar set up but does include a lateral scroll. Does that make sense?

 

I am able to push left or right on my mouse scroll wheel and it scrolls fine that way. Try it.

Just one little request. This may be my own issue with settings or my browser but it would be nice to have a lateral scroll ability particularly for the photo threads. If a thread is posted with slightly oversized photos I have to go to the bottom of the post to scroll over to see the other half of the photo, then scroll back up to see the remainder of the picture; kind of a pain. I don't have the issue when visiting SSP which has a similar set up but does include a lateral scroll. Does that make sense?

 

I think what you actually want is for the posts themselves not to scroll.  The problem is that there is a fixed width (or maximum width) on the posts themselves, so anything too wide will scroll within the posts allotted space, meaning that the scrollbar will be at the bottom of the post.  If the post were allowed to grow in width when it contained wide photos, then the post itself wouldn't scroll, but rather the whole page would become wider than the browser window, and the entire window would scroll, meaning the scrollbars would be at the bottom of the browser window (and thus always visible).

Just one little request. This may be my own issue with settings or my browser but it would be nice to have a lateral scroll ability particularly for the photo threads. If a thread is posted with slightly oversized photos I have to go to the bottom of the post to scroll over to see the other half of the photo, then scroll back up to see the remainder of the picture; kind of a pain. I don't have the issue when visiting SSP which has a similar set up but does include a lateral scroll. Does that make sense?

 

I don't know whether you're running a Mac or a Windows machine; I have no useful knowledge of Mac. I'm running IE8 on a Windows platform, and when I'm browsing a photo thread I can press <Ctrl+> to enlarge the display, or <Ctrl-> to shrink it, to make the photos fit without lateral scrolling. If the gap between preset increments is too great, I can left-click the down arrow in the lower right corner of the browser screen and then select Custom and define my own display size.

While we're on the topic of "How To Scroll In A Web Browser" :) :

 

If you're on a Windows machine, you can press down on the mouse wheel (as if it's a button) and then just move the mouse to scroll.  This works both vertically and horizontally.

 

Also, you should be able to just scroll left and right with the arrow keys on the keyboard as long as the focus is in the browser window (if it isn't, click on any area within the browser window that isn't a link).

 

But back to the site upgrade...please install SMF 2.0 RC4 so I can use Tapatalk! :)