I can't always find my way around this quirky, confusing & sometimes mad place but I usualy get there in the end. To me the confusion & lack of formality is part of the charm &, notwithstanding any of that, the more than occasional nugget of information I have gleened has more than justified the struggle & the bo**ocking I received from our charming hostess for an apparent transgression. ( that's one you owe me Mrs Higginson!!!)
vic
That's an eminently sensible suggestion Norman and one that I tend to use too.
I also struggle with this, understanding the structure does not necessarily help in following the discussion.
And way before the number of pages reach 23, or in this case 6, I have already given up trying to make sense of it.
I can see that I'm not necessarily in any sort of majority here though.
Jane
I'll pass on the resizing... The match was good. The Italian try nearly had me in tears and they could have got two more. They walked over England second half and could have, should have won. They will take the title soon. My lot have to get themselves sorted... after last week's awful game against Wales anyway.
Hi Brian,
re England v. Italy it was close wasn't it? Italy the one-time whipping boys of International Rugby, really playing well. I see them now playing as France used to, releasing the backs - always my favorite part of the game to watch. I know it is off-topic but I am sure you have noticed how all the teams have learned to take care of the big Islanders playing, go in low and they are neutralised to a very large extent. Wonder why it took so long to figure it out?
Back to the subject - not with sequencing, but with a question. How can one reduce the size of attached images? I often use pics. to illustrate a point, but the pics are always gi-normous when they appear. Do I need to lower the size, or is there something in the site that I can work?
Sent. No prob.
It's probably not the easiest system to navigate but once you get used to the fact that it is different, you don't think twice about it.
SFN is something new, it is totally different to what the majority are used to, changing the face of internet networking, real names, real faces, real people and real help. Change does take a little bit of effort but is usually worth it in the long run. If you (using you in the wider sense of vous) want the same old stuff, same old layout, same old anonymous users, same old harsh moderation, there are plenty of traditional forums to use.
I have 'met' some lovely people on here and received much more help than on any forum and I am sure it is down to the open nature of the network and it's founders. Bear with us and I am sure you will have the same experience.
Gail, Gail, no debate. Look, let's put it this way. I know roughly 5 or 6% of members, 99% of them online only, but that 5 or 6% is still hundreds. Some have been member longer than me, a few not very long at all. The comments are coming from a handful of people. Some of them, including me, will have a go at anything we feel needs to be taken to task. Some of them are possibly having a good laugh at this post. As for my figurative use of the word 'shouting', as in 'shouting the odds', they are welcome to as much as they like but my opinion is that whatever is explained they probably miss or ignore because the likes of you and I are increasing the number of posts, thus pages, and since they appear to only want to see the most recent comments...
Rugby time. I wish to see Italy trounce England. I asked the tooth fairy last night;-)
Nope, enough do though. No need for a poll, to quote Catharine 'a vociferous minority' are doing the shouting. Anyway, the rain has stopped again, so back out...
Thanks Paul.
Excuse the brevity but is is a Sunday and we do (try to!) have a life.
If you are considering advertising then James can supply stats.
It is free and will always remain so. As Brian pointed out the donation element is entirely voluntary.
"Overwhelming majority" - no it's a vociferous minority!
SFN is different. It is not a 'traditional' forum layout and never will be. It is a website with the facility to blog, post discussions and upload content. I think if people stopped thinking along the 'forum' line, they would find it less confusing.
And I'm not being 'defensive' - I'm just pointing out that whilst there are elements that we can change, there is a lot that we can't and probably wouldn't choose to!
Bonne dimanche everyone!
Hi Kent
That is a problem that we didn't know about - any chance you could do a screen shot and send it to James as it is beyond my technical expertise to diagnose / explain why it is happening?
Thank you for your kind comments and as far as the donation goes - as they say, it's the thought that counts so thank you anyway! x
Just want to throw in my two-pennorth at this point, Catharine.
I really enjoy the polite, friendly banter of SFN and I understand that difference in 'ordering' comments. One thing I have wanted to mention, however, is that, in 'replying' to someone's comment, the replies tend to move further and further over to the right until they clash with the adverts in the right margin. Nothing against the adds but, after a few replies, the comments become unreadable. Perhaps that's because I use an aging Mac with a small screen; I don't know - but is it fixable? Is there a way to space or ‘wrap’ the comments around the adds?
I do realise the necessity for adverts to keep the wolf from your door - and I would be happy to hit the ‘Donate’ button if it wasn’t for the fact that I’m on something less than a basic UK pension. Not complaining, we get by OK, it’s just there’s nowt to spare.
Cheers m’dears. You’re doing a great job.
Paul, if I may quote "the overwhelming majority of folk who use ( or have used) SFN are finding difficulty in getting to terms with the layout you have chosen to use". I made a rough calculation and see that you must have calculated membership at around 16! Although you are a builder I imagine your original profession was politician the way you use words and numbers. Try also counting the number of people who are saying it is fine as it is and the number of people online who are not bothering to join in. If they had a 'problem' rest assured many of them who some of us know well enough would have commented by now.
Catherine , I think that your reply to Irene although explanatory doesn't really help her or the many others that have contributed . I mean Blog, Forum , discussion whatever - it's all too confusing !!
As I expected when I started this thread ,the overwhelming majority of folk who use ( or have used) SFN are finding difficulty in getting to terms with the layout you have chosen to use . It's such a shame, and I fear that if you don't take these concerns on board and make some changes , then you will not only lose existing members but also anyone new who "pops in" to take a look. As for contributing and making donations, that of course is down to the individual but someone earlier made a very valid point about keeping free as any "forum" open discussion board should be .
I assume ( I know ... I shouldn't ) that you rely on advertisers to keep costs down anyway, but as a potential advertiser myself, I would only advertise on the basis on members and visitor statistics . You will of course keep a hardcore of existing users who look in several times a day at the risk of it becoming "clicky" but if you really want this to grow and become great ( and I belive it has the potential) then please rather than defend your setup , listen to the people who keep this alive.
I would like to add also that I think you are doing a great job and I think this is a very friendly forum with lots of potential contributors " lurking " in the background that would contribute more if it was more user friendly .
I think if you remember that there is a difference between the blog and discussion post - that helps.
Blog posts have newest comments at the top of the page right beneath the post itself, and you cannot reply to an individual comment, you are commenting on the blog post itself.
Discussion threads have the oldest post at the top and all subsequent posts beneath, you also have the ability to reply to an individual comment anywhere in the thread.
So effectively you're replying to the original poster in a blog and potentially discussing with anyone in a discussion thread.
It's the conversational element that is different on SFN and like any good dinner party, there will be times when the conversation goes off at a tangent, times when you miss something and times when you misunderstand someone's point of view!
So sorry. I assumed that since anyone interested in France can join into discussions on a wide range of subjects and were allowed to agree or disagree that this was indeed a forum. Silly of me. Now explained as a "network" I fully understand. The similarity to a "net" where the unwary can get hopelessly entangled makes much more sense.
Having an ego smaller than my bank balance prevents me from inflicting my photograph on an unsuspecting general public. I bid the organisers and the regulars here adieu. Time to move on.
I agree with Paul Punchard
I just scan the email notifications and hit about one in 20. Then that is it. I still haven't the foggiest how to follow a thread or take part in a group.
With so many sites to follow these days there has to be some easy common way of navigating and we can't be expected to learn and retain all of the different routines.
If it isn't intuitive then I tend to move on. I like to think that if I spend time on something then it is rewarding and not frustrating.
With so many sites to follow these days there has to be some easy way of navigating and we can't be expected to learn and retain lots of different routines.
PS don't reply to me but to SFN 'cause I won't know where to look for the reply. ;-)
Now, I am really confused, when I posted my message was at the bottom of the first page and now about 9 minutes later I am at the bottom of the last page. Please put the postings in time order with the latest at the top of page 1. Thank you.
There I have just replied to the thread and it says I posted 3 seconds ago but it is at the bottom of page 1 after those that were posted plus or minus and hour ago. Weird. Please put them on in time order.