For example, say I wish to search for something in the 3rd gen section. I would select the forums shown in the attached snip. However, when selecting the parent forum, the search returns a tidal wave of "Build Threads". It's not a great big deal, but it would be nice if we were able to exclude certain sub forums from searches.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...d5f9cf9c0e.jpg

My thought on this was a Bootstrap reskin. The old style table layout is not very responsive to different screen sizes. This way, the phone and desktop experience would be the same and you only need one _layout. also makes it easier for the Play and Apple stores.

Proposal 4: +

Proposal 5: +

KansasCityREPU, et al:

If you want to vote on proposals then you can type +1 or -1. I'll then record it in a reply to make it official.

With that in mind, thank you KansasCityREPU for your vote.

Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 4: +2

Proposal 5: +2

jarod,

Thanks for your additional remarks on the search function. I searched for something and noted a similar result to yours. How does this sound for a proposal:

-Modify the advanced search feature to include the ability to select specific child forums. Or add the ability to sort and filter the search results by each column description - similar to the sort/filter functions of MS Excel or MS Access. This would enable a member to weed out unnecessary child forums. For example, filter out Time Slips & Dyno sub-forums during a search for FD odometer repair.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...91cbbc7745.jpg
Each carrot represents a sort/filter option.

The above example was modified from the advanced search results. A carrot in each column would enable a member to filter or sort data based upon content, such as Forum. One could uncheck an undesired forum from the results to narrow down the field of view.

Does this look good to you?

"related thread" feature
 

I agree with removing redundancies, dead links, particularly in the FAQ, & possibly rebuilding it ? Removing quoted pics in picture threads ... etc

There have always been issues with forum pages hanging, particularly for members with older computers and OS systems, in part because they can't update to latest versions. I'm not sure the "related thread" feature is particularly useful given that a lot of page loading delays are related to loading the additional unwanted data, especially in picture threads.
When pages hang, you can often get abruptly relocated to the related thread below, that is often for a different RX7 generation, and/or entirely unrelated.
Not to mention related threads in classifieds potentially undercutting your ad. In my opinion the "related thread" feature is a complete waste of time and bandwidth.

This forum is a great resource for RX owners, Thanks for improving it ! Unlinked pics in classifieds will be great

Agreed, bootstrap would make the look and responsiveness better. Are their issues with the mobile webpage layout you are trying to address? I use the web mobile pages from my phone all the time (off topic, I agree the Garage Talk app leaves something to be desired).

Note, the bootstrap change would not have any effect on how to add images to posts. That should be broken out into its own proposal.

Blk_93,

Thank you for adding your comments and participating in the poll. Currently, members have the ability to disable both functions. From the UserCP>Settings&Options>Edit Options> (Scroll down to) Infinite Scroll and Related Threads sections. Do you still experience page hangs and redirects with both functions disabled? That may have some sort of tie-in with Proposal 6, where the use of Bootstrap would change the how members input text or add photos.

Maybe KansasCityREPU could chime in about the compatibility of Bootstrap with older OS/browsers?

Do you propose the elimination of Infinite Scroll and Related Threads functions?

toddk042,

Does that mean you second Proposal 6?

Improvements to add photos are addressed in Proposal 4, which you already support. Did I misread your post?

I'm looking forward to the Classified changes.

One thing I would propose (which is dependent on the changes to the classified area) is a way to filter out closed threads in the classified area (at least). That way you could prevent wading through things that are already sold. Oh, and make posters close their threads when the item has sold.

Now that I'm thinking about it, we have a lot of classified posts that are for multiple items, which quickly become unwieldy as things sell per piece, and the seller adds more stuff. I understand the current classified area is just using the available form/thread structure that is available. If i were to create a classified area, it would have a parent post that would have a grid listing the parts for sale, their price, part number (if available), condition, quantity, and quantity left. It would then have child posts where buyers could ask questions like we do today, but the parent post is where all the updates to whats available would be. No searching through page after page of replies to see whats left.

So, again, I'm looking forward to see what the developers have in store for us.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Number 6 as it is currently stated includes language about improving adding images, which bootstrap would not improve that help of. Otherwise, I'm for number 6.

Todd

I agree, bootstrap is just styling/layout,

Forum Members,

This is an update to correct the language of Proposition 6. According to KansasCityREPU and toddk042, Bootstrap has no bearing on image importation. Therefore, that statement was removed. As always, please review these open proposals to be nominated for forum improvements.

Proposals 4 & 5 are open for votes, however, Propositions 1, 2, 3, and 6 are still open for second nominations.

1. Create a sub-forum titled "Turbocharge a NA motor" in the "Tech and Performance" section. This would be useful to FB/SA22, FC, and Old School Rotary members who wish to add turbos to a naturally aspirated rotary. Originator: WondrousBread

2. Add a "First Unread Message" button/link in the header, similar to the "Go to Last Post" button. This would enable members to quickly view the first unread post of a thread without the need to open the thread first. Maybe the button could have an icon that shows "1st" and an envelope? The button design may not be important; it's illustrating an option that would be different than the ">" button. Originator: Toruki

3. Add a PDF Export function and/or improve the "Show Printable Version" capability of a thread to include photos, instead of displaying a link to them. It gives members the ability and options to print a thread (or relevant segments of it) and/or export it as a PDF for reference. This ability does have merit, especially in how-to or build threads. Originator: Toruki

4. Overhaul the method of image insertion to the composition window (text editor). Add the ability to "drag and drop" and/or "copy and paste" photos into the composition window. For example, the gmail composition window functions in this manner. This would reduce the amount of time and steps it takes to import a photo into a post. Originator: Toruki

5. Create an image repository by generation for entire vehicles and its various sub-assemblies. This would enable the forum to become an authority and a place where members (or outsiders) could trust the imagery and associated data. In addition, images would be readily available and members could see the original thread(s) where it was used. Originator would be available as an advisor. Originator: KansasCity REPU

6. Improve the composition window by replacing the current method with Bootstrap. This would condense coding on multiple platforms (phone, tablet, desktop, etc...) into one streamlined module. Originator would be available as an advisor. Originator: KansasCity REPU

As a reminder of parliamentary procedure, these proposals require support from RX-7Club members. It takes one member to say, "I second proposal x". Afterwards, it is put up for a vote by the membership. For example, I would say, "All in favor of proposal x then vote +1 (for yea) or -1 (for nay). These steps help prioritize the importance of changes to our forum. Otherwise, these proposals would die on the vine without YOUR support.

Thank you again for all the comments and suggestions. Shall we keep them coming? Don't forget to show support on the remaining 4 proposals with a "second" nomination!

Sample Marketplace Screenshots
 

Todd, et al:

Here is a SAMPLE of what the new marketplace would look like on our forum. I cannot stress enough that this is a sample. It is being tested/debugged for the time being. Based upon my brief interaction with it, there are parent-child relationships in Part Out threads. Please see the photos below for more.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...8bc57a1546.jpg
Main Marketplace interface


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...3b29d2efc3.jpg
A sample part out thread with subordinate (child) post for parts.

Awesome. I'm happy with those upcoming updates.

I'll second proposal 6.

todd

Todd,

Thank you for nominating Proposal 6 for voting!

All in favor of Proposals 4, 5, and/or 6 please vote +1 for yea and -1 for nay. I will add to the official count after I recognize each member's vote.

Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 4: +2
Proposal 5: +2
Proposal 6:

Will the MarketPlace have an area for pre-rx-7? (rx-2. rx-3, etc...)

KansasCityREPU,

That is an excellent question. I am researching that answer for you.

Members,

I tested another function of the part-out thread: adding other items for sale after the initial ad posted. It works so long as the Seller uses the "Edit" button.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...2468e3dc7a.jpg
Updated Part-out thread with 2 parts added after initial post.

That marketplace ad sample looks good.

Please add my +1 vote for the following proposals:
3 (Improve 'Print Entire Thread' by including images )
4 (Improve adding images to text posts)

I also have a proposal:

Merge all the posts from the 'Single Turbo FAQ' subforum back into the 'Single Turbo RX-7's' section, and remove it as a separate subforum. All the threads in the 'Single Turbo FAQ' subforum are from 2005 or older, and most of the info in those threads is outdated. In case any of that info might be useful, edit or replace this stickied post to include links to each of the threads that were in the 'Single Turbo FAQ' subforum, similar to the 'FAQ and Useful Links' thread in the 3rd Generation Specific section. https://www.rx7club.com/single-turbo...ection-977627/

I would be willing to help with editing the stickied post, or creating a new one with links to the old threads.

edit

Scotty,

Thanks for your votes & other suggestions. I would address your suggestion in another post. But first, Proposal 3 has not been nominated yet. Following procedure, would you second Proposal 3? If so, should I then add your vote to it?

Additionally, I acknowledge your vote +1 for Proposal 4.


Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 4: +3
Proposal 5: +2
Proposal 6:

Scotty,

Thanks for identifying a forum that could be streamlined! Before we add it to the list of proposals, shall we work on the wording?

You are proposing:
- Merge content from the Single Turbo FAQ sub-forum back into the Single Turbo RX-7s sub-forum (found under "Tech & Performance" section). Most of the FAQ content is outdated. Additionally, revise/update the sticky threads in the Single Turbo RX-7s sub-forum. These efforts would reduce the need for additional sub-forums, reduce confusion of relevant threads, and reflect current best practices for single turbo applications. Originator is willing to advise and assist when necessary.

How does that sound? What would you suggest?

Remove the General Discussion Sub-forum from the Generation Specific forums, and merge those threads into the Generation specific section. The reason at least in the 2nd Gen section where I reside is it's just redundant. People post the same posts and ask the same questions in the General Discussion section as in the regular Generation specific section. Such as why won't my car start , which exhaust should I buy, or where does this wire go, etc. In order to see all the posts where someone may have an issue with their car one has to go to two different sections so some people's post may get missed.

Dak,

Thank you for sharing your recommendation about merging the General Discussion sub-forum into the main forum of each chassis. This specific topic was discussed among some moderators prior to this Poll thread.

Have you the opportunity to download and look through my proposed changes PDF? That link can be found in Post #1. I believe there is a need for a general forum and one for technical content. In theory, this would allow people to find/use/create how-to's and address specific mechanical and electrical concerns with a specific chassis. It even proposes the use of thread tags that break down each sub-system of the RX-7 to aid in searches or to help technical experts quickly sort through topics to address.

Furthermore, the proposal would change the title of each Generation sub-forum to read:
1. FD/FC/FB/Old School Rotary Technical (main technical content for users to ask specific electrical/mechanical questions)
1.a. General Discussion (Topics general in nature that are not addressed in a specific technical area)

If all content was posted into the main area of each chassis then there would be a greater propensity for a given thread to become lost in a sea of other threads. Furthermore, would you want to have a picture mega-thread in the same area as Taurus Alternator related-threads?

In all fairness, you propose the following:
- Merge content from each General Discussion sub-forum into its respective Generational main forum. Then remove the General Discussion forum from each Generation forum. This would reduce redundant sub-forums because similar content is currently duplicated between the main and general discussion areas.

Did I understand your recommendation? Is there anything you wish to add, clarify, or take away?

For members who already voted or who plan to vote on "Remove post restrictions except for the marketplace..." would you kindly express what post count a new user should have prior to accessing the marketplace? The current restriction is 10 posts.

Thank you in advance!

Here's another thought. Perhaps add a warning message or a "I'm not a robot" verification for people attempting to bump threads that haven't been updated in over a decade? I've seen a few really old ones pushed up in the 1st gen section lately.

chuyler1,

Could you be a little more specific? Are you referring to a captcha form of verification after a member logs into the forum? How would that either streamline or benefit the forum?

Keeps content relevant. I have no issue with old threads getting bumped when the need arises, but sometimes a quick reminder to the user that they are about to ask a question on a thread that has been dormant for a decade is useful.

kutukutu1,

Currently, Proposals 1, 2, and 3 have not been nominated as "seconds". Do you wish to second them? I ask that you follow our parliamentary procedures previously discussed. As a reminder, after a proposal receives a "second" nomination could we open the floor for votes.

I'd be happy to record your support for Proposals 1, 2, and 3, or others afterwards.

Yes you did understand my recommendation. You do raise a valid counter point. I guess a mega picture thread would be in the current non-technical and pictures section which looks like it is going away in the proposed layout. My problem is with redundancies between the two sections. For example we have Taurus alternator threads in both sections currently. I do like the proposed use of thread tags. I guess if we could somehow do better at differentiating between the two and/or policing them so they remain true to their intended subjects. Maybe a description that more clearly defines what should be in the General discussion sub-forum is a start. Otherwise I stand behind my suggestion of removing the General Discussion forum of each Generation forum.

chuyler1,

Thanks again for the amplifying remarks. I am concerned that implementing a control as you suggest would create additional restrictions that may push members away. Could we employ other methods that we currently have? What about identifying old threads, closing them, then archiving them? This way content is not lost - members may still reference a closed thread for pertinent information. What are your thoughts?

If you are concerned that a new member is an actual human and not a bot then that is a separate issue that could be addressed. Did I misunderstand your recommendations?

I'd like to second Proposal number 3 if it hasn't been already and I overlooked it.
I'd also like to add my votes to the following.

+1 for #4
+1 for #5
Thanks.

Dak,

Thank you for the continued dialog. And again, thanks for your support on the use of thread tags. If that is truly the case then may I add you as an "official" supporter for it?

Are you more concerned about the lack of definition between technical and non-technical content areas (sub-forums)?

I agree that the line between the technical sub-forum and general discussion forum can be easily blurred. Sometimes, a thread may initially start in a general discussion sub-forum but then its content turns into a technical session (and vice versa).

Instead of proposing the deletion of the General Discussion sub-forum would you be open to proposing that the Club better define guidelines for posting technical content and general content in their respective sub-forums? This could also spell out the roles of members and moderators. The result would create a standard for members and moderators to follow and reduce the guess work of where to post and/or where to move a thread (via moderator).

Would that address your chief complaint of thread duplication between technical and non-technical sub-forums? What do you prefer?

Thank you for the votes, Dak!

I acknowledge your votes for Proposal 4 of +1 and Proposal 5 of +1. Moreover, thank your for the "second" nomination for Proposal 3! Please let me know if you wish to vote for Proposal 3.

*Break, Break*

All members: All in favor of Proposal 3 please vote +1 for yea and -1 for nay.

Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 3:
Proposal 4: +4
Proposal 5: +3
Proposal 6:

kutukutu1,

Thank you for the feedback on post count restrictions and support for the Club. May I ask how would a member with a post count of 1 gain your trust? What if that member's introduction was, "hey...zup? This is my 1 post so I can get my parts then leave." I would argue that such a post would be too long of an intro.

Picture this: A new member, joined 1hr ago, made an intro post of, "1st post so I can hit up the marketplace" He then heads to your ad for a $500 turbo then posts to it: "yo man i gotta get that turbo shipped for $400." What would you do?

Would a 1 post minimum really deter anyone from using or abusing the forum for its resources then bail?

Again, my thanks for providing the additional feedback on post restrictions!

Archiving/locking threads where the last post was 5-10+ years ago would be a perfect solution.

proposal 2 +1
proposal 4 +1

Yes. Sorry. I second proposal 1,2,3.

kutukutu1,

Thank your for the second nominations for Proposals 1, 2, and 3! Would you care to vote on any of the 6 proposals now?

All in favor of Proposals 1 through 6: Please vote +1 for yea and -1 for nay.

Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 1:
Proposal 2:
Proposal 3:
Proposal 4: +4
Proposal 5: +3
Proposal 6:

Templeton,

Thank you for voting on both proposals. I recognize your vote of +1 for Proposal 2 and vote +1 for Proposal 4.

Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 1:
Proposal 2: +1
Proposal 3:
Proposal 4: +5
Proposal 5: +3
Proposal 6:

To summarize, all 6 proposals listed below are open for member voting.

1. Create a sub-forum titled "Turbocharge a NA motor" in the "Tech and Performance" section. This would be useful to FB/SA22, FC, and Old School Rotary members who wish to add turbos to a naturally aspirated rotary. Originator: WondrousBread

2. Add a "First Unread Message" button/link in the header, similar to the "Go to Last Post" button. This would enable members to quickly view the first unread post of a thread without the need to open the thread first. Maybe the button could have an icon that shows "1st" and an envelope? The button design may not be important; it's illustrating an option that would be different than the ">" button. Originator: Toruki

3. Add a PDF Export function and/or improve the "Show Printable Version" capability of a thread to include photos, instead of displaying a link to them. It gives members the ability and options to print a thread (or relevant segments of it) and/or export it as a PDF for reference. This ability does have merit, especially in how-to or build threads. Originator: Toruki

4. Overhaul the method of image insertion to the composition window (text editor). Add the ability to "drag and drop" and/or "copy and paste" photos into the composition window. For example, the gmail composition window functions in this manner. This would reduce the amount of time and steps it takes to import a photo into a post. Originator: Toruki

5. Create an image repository by generation for entire vehicles and its various sub-assemblies. This would enable the forum to become an authority and a place where members (or outsiders) could trust the imagery and associated data. In addition, images would be readily available and members could see the original thread(s) where it was used. Originator would be available as an advisor. Originator: KansasCity REPU

6. Improve the composition window by replacing the current method with Bootstrap. This would condense coding on multiple platforms (phone, tablet, desktop, etc...) into one streamlined module. Originator would be available as an advisor. Originator: KansasCity REPU

Thank you again for all the comments and suggestions. Shall we keep them coming? Don't forget to show support or opposition to these 6 proposals.

chuyler1,

Great! Let's work on a draft so it may be added to the list of proposals. How does this sound?

- Establish a small working group tasked with identifying old threads, closing them, then archiving them when the last post was 7+ years old (basically, anything older than 2012). This small work group could be chaired by a moderator and comprised of 4 Club members (max) to identify and review these old threads in their respective sub-forums (1st Gen, 2nd Gen, etc...). This would allow members to reference a closed thread for pertinent information and avoid thread bumps for the purpose of rapidly inflating a junior member's post count.

Sure you may add me as a supporter of thread tags.
It is the lack of definition between the technical and non-technical content areas( sub-forums) that caused me to propose the deletion of the General Discussion sub forum. On the other hand It wasn't even added(referring to the way back machine) until Jan. 2016 and IIRC we were ok without them. To be honest I'm torn between the two options of "proposing that the Club better define guidelines for posting technical content and general content in their respective sub-forums? This could also spell out the roles of members and moderators." or proposing they be deleted. If better defining them works I'd be happy but if not I'll be like man I should pushed for deletion. Can we put it to a vote and see which direction others would like to go?

Also add my +1 vote to Proposal #3.

Dak,

It was good to read your response.

You are added as a supporter for thread tags. Additionally, I acknowledge your vote of +1 for Proposal 3.

For now, let's address your suggestion in its original form:
- Remove the General Discussion sub-forum from each Generation specific forums (1st Gen, 2nd Gen, etc...), and merge those threads into the main Generation specific section. This would reduce redundant posts - members ask the same questions in the General Discussion section as in the main Generation specific section. Such as, "why won't my car star?" "Which exhaust should I buy?" Or "where does this wire go?"... This removal would reduce the number of sub-forums a member would search (from 2 to 1 forums) and the likelihood of missing a thread would be significantly reduced.

What do you think?

This is an updated vote count on Proposals 1 through 6.

Proposal Vote Count:
Proposal 1:
Proposal 2: +1
Proposal 3: +1
Proposal 4: +5
Proposal 5: +3
Proposal 6:

To summarize, all 6 proposals listed below are open for member voting.

1. Create a sub-forum titled "Turbocharge a NA motor" in the "Tech and Performance" section. This would be useful to FB/SA22, FC, and Old School Rotary members who wish to add turbos to a naturally aspirated rotary. Originator: WondrousBread

2. Add a "First Unread Message" button/link in the header, similar to the "Go to Last Post" button. This would enable members to quickly view the first unread post of a thread without the need to open the thread first. Maybe the button could have an icon that shows "1st" and an envelope? The button design may not be important; it's illustrating an option that would be different than the ">" button. Originator: Toruki

3. Add a PDF Export function and/or improve the "Show Printable Version" capability of a thread to include photos, instead of displaying a link to them. It gives members the ability and options to print a thread (or relevant segments of it) and/or export it as a PDF for reference. This ability does have merit, especially in how-to or build threads. Originator: Toruki

4. Overhaul the method of image insertion to the composition window (text editor). Add the ability to "drag and drop" and/or "copy and paste" photos into the composition window. For example, the gmail composition window functions in this manner. This would reduce the amount of time and steps it takes to import a photo into a post. Originator: Toruki

5. Create an image repository by generation for entire vehicles and its various sub-assemblies. This would enable the forum to become an authority and a place where members (or outsiders) could trust the imagery and associated data. In addition, images would be readily available and members could see the original thread(s) where it was used. Originator would be available as an advisor. Originator: KansasCity REPU

6. Improve the composition window by replacing the current method with Bootstrap. This would condense coding on multiple platforms (phone, tablet, desktop, etc...) into one streamlined module. Originator would be available as an advisor. Originator: KansasCity REPU

Thank you again for all the comments and suggestions. Shall we keep them coming? Don't forget to show support or opposition to these 6 proposals.

Sounds good.

One editor I've used for #4 (text editor) is the tinyMCE.