 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lukas is gonna kill me for this, but do we really need to have the CD comments duplicated at the messageboard? To have the comments from the blogs posted is one thing (that kinda makes sense, I guess), but I'm not so sure about these CD "reviews", which is really an entity of its own and isn't automatically a point of discussion.
Or alternatively, is there a way to "block" out these particular comments, like we are able to block out the avatars? That would be neat.
You're right. Lukas is going to want to kill you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Feb 1, 2009 - 11:42 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
And there's a good side to this: This guarantees that additional comments through this new feature always remain in the SAME thread! 
Not really, because there are already many threads on WHERE EAGLES DARE and OPERATION CROSSBOW that ARE actual discussions, initiated for that purpose. These CD comments - posted at a totally different place and not really intended for interaction in the first place - wouldn't necessarily form a discussion and is really out-of-place on a messageboard, IMO. But hey, I like the whole CD comments thing.
Not that big of a problem, I guess, but I just picture the board full of CD comment threads with lots of incoherent and individual posts that aren't really adressing each other. But I'm willing to see how it plays out first.
Of course, the even more confusing thing is that my comments are also now posted simultaneously below the CD, in "comments" area, disrupting what is supposed to be list of relevant comments about that particular CD!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've an idea...
Let's change the name of this board to THOR SCORE MONTHLY.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know why you think that because for most of us, we see these show up on the board first and not on the CD page, so its like any other discussion thread.
Sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. There could be many people who post on the CD without being messageboard members. And they would also be totally confused about where THESE "meta-comments" are coming from!
I am always confused when you throw in this "meta comment" bullshit. Talk normal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thor, I don't know if you found a design flaw, or are one. Nobody else seems to mind. We broke our backs and sometimes our banks making these CDs so forgive me if I want people to notice the feedback on them -- and it made sense to integrate the board, blog and CDs in this fashion.
I also thought that these CD comments might be a good place to suss out where people might still have questions about a CD before ordering it -- ask away.
Lukas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 1, 2009 - 12:16 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
Thor, I don't know if you found a design flaw, or are one. Nobody else seems to mind. We broke our backs and sometimes our banks making these CDs so forgive me if I want people to notice the feedback on them -- and it made sense to integrate the board, blog and CDs in this fashion.
Board and blog, yes. CD reviews, not so much. And please don't pull out the ol' "we're busting our asses making these CD's for you and you'd better damn be grateful for it and shut up!" sympathy routine, as the CD's are not the issue here. Nor is your excellent work on the site or anything else. Everyone agrees that you're doing a superb job in these departments and that these are important releases. No, this is only about what makes sense to have on a DISCUSSION BOARD. I honestly don't see any benefit from integrating this here. The people who post here are already aware of the releases and create threads for them, while the feedback exposure to non-members come perfectly through on the CD page and the comments therein. To me, this is more confusing than added exposure.
Anyways, just a minor befuddlement (or whatever the word is). As I said, it should be interesting to see how it plays out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thor, I don't know if you found a design flaw, or are one. Nobody else seems to mind. We broke our backs and sometimes our banks making these CDs so forgive me if I want people to notice the feedback on them -- and it made sense to integrate the board, blog and CDs in this fashion.
Board and blog, yes. CD reviews, not so much. And please don't pull out the ol' "we're busting our asses making these CD's for you and you'd better damn be grateful for it and shut up!" sympathy routine, as the CD's are not the issue here. Nor is your excellent work on the site or anything else. Everyone agrees that you're doing a superb job in these departments and that these are important releases. No, this is only about what makes sense to have on a DISCUSSION BOARD. I honestly don't see any benefit from integrating this here. The people who post here are already aware of the releases and create threads for them, while the feedback exposure to non-members come perfectly through on the CD page and the comments therein. To me, this is more confusing than added exposure.
Anyways, just a minor befuddlement (or whatever the word is). As I said, it should be interesting to see how it plays out.
You're right. Lukas is going to want to kill you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
