What about a red bar that says "Topic Threads" and a red bar that says "Community Threads" and a red bar that says "Closed Threads" rather than "Subfolders" and "Discussion Threads?" Would that be any harder to code than what we have now?

Yes. I mean, what we have now requires zero coding since it's already done, so every change is more.

Right now, as architecture goes, there are folders. The only distinction between folders is a) their parentage (what they're a sub of -- everything's sub except for main page, admin, or site tools) b) their names.

To code a difference between types of folders ... that's more complex, and I'm open to database modelling suggestions for it.

Closed threads could be made a subfolder of something else, though ... Site Tools. I don't think the code allows for that, but it should, and that doesn't sprain my brain.

I'm pretty much over "Threads" for what I thought were non-threaded discussion spaces

That ship sailed before we left TT.

what we have now requires zero coding since it's already done, so every change is more.

Well, yeah.

Closed threads could be made a subfolder of something else, though ... Site Tools. I don't think the code allows for that, but it should, and that doesn't sprain my brain.

This makes sense to me.

Could you leave the folders as they are from the database's perspective, but change the user interface? If not, it's not a big deal (at least to me). I'm cool with the way it is now.

I think, Daniel, that as ita explained here: ita "Buffistas Building a Better Board ++" Aug 19, 2005 3:20:06 pm PDT that for it to get a slug/description means it probably won't happen because it requires other coding.

Okay, fair enough. I still like the idea of calling it

Film and TV Threads

Because it's simply not intuitive as it is currently named. Andi could not find the Minearverse thread, and only by both of us saying "what's this?" was she able to find it.

I knew there was a subfolders discussion, and yet I didn't catch it at first.

Could you leave the folders as they are from the database's perspective, but change the user interface?

The user interface is dynamically generated. So you need to change either (well, both) the database structure and the logic that parses it.

DCJ, you really think the word threads would fix that?

I guess I underestimated the degree to which people hadn't processed the Closed folder, then.

Like the organization just fine. New names (rather than "subfolders") like Calling the Film/TV /Literature/Closed threads area "Culture" and the other "Community" or "This" and "That" or whatever clever nomenclature we come up with would make what goes where easier to suss out.

I think I'm not explaining myself right. The descriptions in the red bars? Not so hard-coded. Look at Film and TV now.

The community section is currently the front page. The front page has no name. The Film/TV/Literature/Closed threads area isn't Culture now, and there's no structural reason it would always be Culture in the future.

The wording doesn't bother me the way it is, but for the sake of consistency I do think both titles should either contain the word "threads" or not.

Or maybe instead of "Subfolders," the red bar could say "Foldered Threads." Just to be blazingly obvious about it.

The user interface is dynamically generated. So you need to change either (well, both) the database structure and the logic that parses it.

Yeah, I figured.

How about "Threads," "Other Threads," "Still More Threads," and "Bojangler?"

DCJ, you really think the word threads would fix that?

It would help, unless adding one more word to the name causes great pain and suffering.

At least while the whole thing is in flux.

From an outside perspective, Film and TV could mean anything, and being separated from the main discussion area by "subfolders" and with the closed threads even more so.

(Oh, but then the wording on the Film/TV page gets messed up, and the way that page looks is awesome.)

I'm so conflicted.