Artist Tavern + Trigger Libraries and Scripts + Art Assets + Trigger Assets + Third Party Tools = Custom Assets.
Why?
A good forum is an active forum. A lot of these sections contain very little activity, and as such are stagnant. Merging the subforums provides a greater scope of possible topics, and hopefully greater activity.
I dont see inactive sub-forums as a problem. Accessibility is far more important. Being able to quickly locate information is something I equate to a better user experience.
Merging sub-forums is what I would deem an artificial solution. Some sub forums will always have less activity(Due to its nature). Nothing we can do about that. We actually complicate things further by mixing everything up. In the long run, merging most/all sub-forums would just make it too convoluted.
I agree with eternal, having specialized subforums is one of the things i love about this forum, it's so easy to just get "the right help" fast and easy. Don't ruin that please :p
Actually had a discussion about that in the mod forums after Mapcraft two weeks back, came to the decision that it's probably a bit better as it is anyway. Fact that some forums are empty isn't that big of a deal - it'd just get more confusing if we had to shove those topics in with other boards. Especially in your example, the 'Map Media' board would just get crowded with a bunch of random threads - as it is, we have Review for actual reviews, Feedback for actual threads of projects in beta and Suggestions/Requests for posts and ideas nobody cares about. All boards are pretty active and mixing them up would create one hugely busy forum.
Note that the stuff I write below is my own opinion, and not that of the moderators in general.
UI Development section is (almost) entirely about SC2Layout Files, and not Dialogs/Dialog Items. Sure you can have posts there about whether or not some UI setup looks good orso while it is made out of dialogs, but it isn't the place to ask how to do dialog specific stuff. like have a dialog button click cause an unit to dance.
Also the Term Triggers doesn't give people the idea that it would also contain UI specific stuff, like once more SC2Layout files. Which are unique to the UI Development. So in other words, the UI Development forum can't be joined with the Trigger forum because of the different focus they have.
And well in general now:
All these specific forums we have here allow people to find the answer to their specific problem faster. It does not matter much if your question overlaps between Triggers and Data, you would get redirected by the people viewing the thread to the correct forum and Moderators would probably even help you by moving your post to the correct forum, so you don't have to create an entirely new thread for it. eg. something you wanted to do in data isn't possible there, but you can do it with triggers, or vise-versa.
Also you say that they are inactive... if some forums are indeed inactive and not just having low-activity, then we might even be better off without them, since nobody uses them anyway.... While you are confronting the low-activity stuff, because there are few people who use it. or it isn't used that often. The UI Dev forum is a good example of something that people will barely post in. Most of the time that they are working on their map, they are working on functionality (Terrain/Triggers/Data/Models/etc.) but when they come to the part where they say: our UI doesn't suffice they will head over to the UI Dev forum. but if it isn't there then they would not know where to look and would have to browse through all the forums to find the correct one. Which is actually worse because if they ask a question about the UI in the Trigger forum, then nobody would reply to it, because they wouldn't know the answer to the question because it is specifically directed to the UI. my UI Tutorial contains a good number of UI questions on its own. But I would be the only one monitoring that, and it is better to have a forum about UI where multiple people can keep track of the questions and reply to it, because they either have the same problem or had the problem and know the answer, or are willing to check the problem and give a solution.
And what if you want a custom image made, first stop Artist Tavern while when you are not certain of what you want and are looking for images, then you would go to the Art Assets to browse the art there. When you are looking for Art, you don't want to open a thread that says: Dialog Backgrounds made Easy, and notice that it does not contain Images that can be used as dialog backgrounds, but instead contains a trigger library which holds a trigger that can be used to create and modify the background for dialogs with the specification of the type of image used (Border/Normal/....)
Or turning it around, you want to make custom images for people because you like working with art programs. You would want to create a thread in which people can place requests for certain images. Having this thread inside a forum where tons of people also post other stuff makes it kinda useless because nobody would notice that you are willing to create images for them. Having the Artist Tavern allows Image designers their own thread and allows them to be found easily.
Project workplace and Map Feedback could be merged as both fulfil almost exactly the same role with maps having posts in both.
I disagree with that because of the following:
Project Workplace = Mostly work in progress (you could even say a log of what you are working on for the map etc.)
Map Feedback = only work that is (almost) out of alpha stage. (so basically asking players to find the bugs that you have missed)
another difference is that projects in Project Workplace do not always request feedback, but are more of a showcase of this is what I've made. while Map Feedback is specifically focused at "I've created this and what do you think can be improved?"
Ok maps from the Project Workspace get mentioned in Map Feedback, because they have reached the point where feedback is needed.
But what you say could also load to: Project Workspace and the Maps section should be merged since they both contain the same information.
which are also 2 different things. Maps section is the location where you can upload the maps you've made, but until you've reached the point where other people can play around in your map you would only have the Project Workspace available. Also the Project Workspace is more publicly visible compared to the Maps section.
Its true the differences are there in the description, but people put their maps in project workplace to get feedback about ideas or the small bits they've done so far, plenty of people also put their ideas or pre alpha maps in map feedback.
I think that im trying to say is people are looking for feedback whatever stage of the process they are in, and theres not much need to differentiate between pre and post alpha.
Merge the Map Feedback and Project Development PLEASE. They seem to be pretty much be used for the same purpose? I.e. For members of the community to advertise their map and get some replies.
I believe would be beneficial to the community and lead to just 3 basic project/map sections all together near the top of the page:
Review - Bringing peoples attention to maps you've found online.
Feedback - Introducing you're new or existing project in whatever state of form it is to the community.
Teams - Gathering people together or putting yourself forward for a team.
Thus not fragmenting/splitting the community between some browsing down there and some up here?
Project Workplace = Mostly work in progress (you could even say a log of what you are working on for the map etc.)
Map Feedback = only work that is (almost) out of alpha stage. (so basically asking players to find the bugs that you have missed)
another difference is that projects in Project Workplace do not always request feedback, but are more of a showcase of this is what I've made. while Map Feedback is specifically focused at "I've created this and what do you think can be improved?"
Ok maps from the Project Workspace get mentioned in Map Feedback, because they have reached the point where feedback is needed.
But what you say could also load to: Project Workspace and the Maps section should be merged since they both contain the same information.
which are also 2 different things. Maps section is the location where you can upload the maps you've made, but until you've reached the point where other people can play around in your map you would only have the Project Workspace available. Also the Project Workspace is more publicly visible compared to the Maps section.
The problem with what you're saying is that which ever section you make a thread in you're going to get less audience. Whatever stage your map is in, you want as many people as possible to click on your thread and have a look.
People can see what stage a project is in simply by reading the thread and giving the appropriate feedback.
I think what Eiviyn proposed is a bit extreme, I think there are several cases of forum redundancy that could be addressed.
Artist Tavern and Art assets could either be merged, or Art Assets could become another sub-forum within the former. Data assets as well.
Alternatively, data assets could become a sub-forum within the Data forum, but I don't think it needs its own forum in any case.
Project workplace and map feedback too. Definitely quite a bit of redundancy there.
But I don't think it's going to make or break mapster in either case.
Well specifically for maps/projects ignoring the rest for time being.
It would be best for everyone if as many people as possible looked at at each map/project thread. Ideally less sections would be a positive thing for everyone.
I definitely don't think merging Map Feedback and Project Workplace is a good idea at all. If they were combined I wouldn't bother posting projects in there at all. I'd go to General or anywhere else that doesn't say "Looking for feedback."
I go to Project Workplace when I want to see upcoming projects. These people aren't asking me to critique their map, they want me to look at it.
I go to Map Feedback when I'm wanting to help other people make their map better. These people WANT me to look at their map in detail and tell them what could be better.
It makes far more sense to merge Map Review/Feedback.
Outside of that, I don't really see much that needs to be merged. There is a distinct difference between most of the sections that is important to keep, especially for the veterans of each category. I see there being the discussion section and then the reference section for Art/Triggers/Data etc. If you start combining these it would be like combining a storage closet and a tavern. I'd stop going to sections of the forums if you started cluttering the areas I go to discuss with reference material I don't need. Especially if you combined Art (something I frequent all the time despite not posting) with Triggers (something I will probably never look at)
I honestly think that the real problem has to do with the order of things and naming conventions. Social sections should be at the top while reference sections be at the bottom. The only exception being tutorials. Many mappers come to our site for these exclusively.
Revised Order and names:
General
General Chat
SC2Mapster Discussion
Map Discussion (Review + Feedback)
Tutorials
Project Development
Project Workplace
Melee Maps
Map Requests
The Galaxy Editor
Questions (Miscellaneous Development is a poor name. All that I see here are questions from people who don't know what part of the editor to go to. All of this could fit into one of the other sections, but could work if renamed to reflect what actually happens here. The moderators could even sort these into the appropriate threads once the questions are answered.)
I've thought for a while is that the forum has too many inactive subforums, so I'd like to propose the following;
Map Review + Map Feedback + Map Suggestions/Requests = Map Media.
Triggers + UI Development = Triggers.
Artist Tavern + Trigger Libraries and Scripts + Art Assets + Trigger Assets + Third Party Tools = Custom Assets.
Why?
A good forum is an active forum. A lot of these sections contain very little activity, and as such are stagnant. Merging the subforums provides a greater scope of possible topics, and hopefully greater activity.
Thoughts?
@Eiviyn: Go
I dont see inactive sub-forums as a problem. Accessibility is far more important. Being able to quickly locate information is something I equate to a better user experience.
Merging sub-forums is what I would deem an artificial solution. Some sub forums will always have less activity(Due to its nature). Nothing we can do about that. We actually complicate things further by mixing everything up. In the long run, merging most/all sub-forums would just make it too convoluted.
I agree with eternal, having specialized subforums is one of the things i love about this forum, it's so easy to just get "the right help" fast and easy. Don't ruin that please :p
Actually had a discussion about that in the mod forums after Mapcraft two weeks back, came to the decision that it's probably a bit better as it is anyway. Fact that some forums are empty isn't that big of a deal - it'd just get more confusing if we had to shove those topics in with other boards. Especially in your example, the 'Map Media' board would just get crowded with a bunch of random threads - as it is, we have Review for actual reviews, Feedback for actual threads of projects in beta and Suggestions/Requests for posts and ideas nobody cares about. All boards are pretty active and mixing them up would create one hugely busy forum.
What EW said, basically.
I think combining map feedback and map reveiw would be okay, but ya, combining triggers and UI? errrrrr no.
Note that the stuff I write below is my own opinion, and not that of the moderators in general.
UI Development section is (almost) entirely about SC2Layout Files, and not Dialogs/Dialog Items. Sure you can have posts there about whether or not some UI setup looks good orso while it is made out of dialogs, but it isn't the place to ask how to do dialog specific stuff. like have a dialog button click cause an unit to dance.
Also the Term Triggers doesn't give people the idea that it would also contain UI specific stuff, like once more SC2Layout files. Which are unique to the UI Development. So in other words, the UI Development forum can't be joined with the Trigger forum because of the different focus they have.
And well in general now:
All these specific forums we have here allow people to find the answer to their specific problem faster. It does not matter much if your question overlaps between Triggers and Data, you would get redirected by the people viewing the thread to the correct forum and Moderators would probably even help you by moving your post to the correct forum, so you don't have to create an entirely new thread for it. eg. something you wanted to do in data isn't possible there, but you can do it with triggers, or vise-versa.
Also you say that they are inactive... if some forums are indeed inactive and not just having low-activity, then we might even be better off without them, since nobody uses them anyway.... While you are confronting the low-activity stuff, because there are few people who use it. or it isn't used that often. The UI Dev forum is a good example of something that people will barely post in. Most of the time that they are working on their map, they are working on functionality (Terrain/Triggers/Data/Models/etc.) but when they come to the part where they say: our UI doesn't suffice they will head over to the UI Dev forum. but if it isn't there then they would not know where to look and would have to browse through all the forums to find the correct one. Which is actually worse because if they ask a question about the UI in the Trigger forum, then nobody would reply to it, because they wouldn't know the answer to the question because it is specifically directed to the UI. my UI Tutorial contains a good number of UI questions on its own. But I would be the only one monitoring that, and it is better to have a forum about UI where multiple people can keep track of the questions and reply to it, because they either have the same problem or had the problem and know the answer, or are willing to check the problem and give a solution.
And what if you want a custom image made, first stop Artist Tavern while when you are not certain of what you want and are looking for images, then you would go to the Art Assets to browse the art there. When you are looking for Art, you don't want to open a thread that says: Dialog Backgrounds made Easy, and notice that it does not contain Images that can be used as dialog backgrounds, but instead contains a trigger library which holds a trigger that can be used to create and modify the background for dialogs with the specification of the type of image used (Border/Normal/....)
Or turning it around, you want to make custom images for people because you like working with art programs. You would want to create a thread in which people can place requests for certain images. Having this thread inside a forum where tons of people also post other stuff makes it kinda useless because nobody would notice that you are willing to create images for them. Having the Artist Tavern allows Image designers their own thread and allows them to be found easily.
So basically I agree with EW as well.
Project workplace and Map Feedback could be merged as both fulfil almost exactly the same role with maps having posts in both.
I disagree with that because of the following:
Project Workplace = Mostly work in progress (you could even say a log of what you are working on for the map etc.)
Map Feedback = only work that is (almost) out of alpha stage. (so basically asking players to find the bugs that you have missed)
another difference is that projects in Project Workplace do not always request feedback, but are more of a showcase of this is what I've made. while Map Feedback is specifically focused at "I've created this and what do you think can be improved?"
Ok maps from the Project Workspace get mentioned in Map Feedback, because they have reached the point where feedback is needed.
But what you say could also load to: Project Workspace and the Maps section should be merged since they both contain the same information.
which are also 2 different things. Maps section is the location where you can upload the maps you've made, but until you've reached the point where other people can play around in your map you would only have the Project Workspace available. Also the Project Workspace is more publicly visible compared to the Maps section.
@Helral: Go
Its true the differences are there in the description, but people put their maps in project workplace to get feedback about ideas or the small bits they've done so far, plenty of people also put their ideas or pre alpha maps in map feedback.
I think that im trying to say is people are looking for feedback whatever stage of the process they are in, and theres not much need to differentiate between pre and post alpha.
Merge the Map Feedback and Project Development PLEASE. They seem to be pretty much be used for the same purpose? I.e. For members of the community to advertise their map and get some replies.
I believe would be beneficial to the community and lead to just 3 basic project/map sections all together near the top of the page:
Thus not fragmenting/splitting the community between some browsing down there and some up here?
Would that be better?
The problem with what you're saying is that which ever section you make a thread in you're going to get less audience. Whatever stage your map is in, you want as many people as possible to click on your thread and have a look.
People can see what stage a project is in simply by reading the thread and giving the appropriate feedback.
I think what Eiviyn proposed is a bit extreme, I think there are several cases of forum redundancy that could be addressed.
Artist Tavern and Art assets could either be merged, or Art Assets could become another sub-forum within the former. Data assets as well.
Alternatively, data assets could become a sub-forum within the Data forum, but I don't think it needs its own forum in any case.
Project workplace and map feedback too. Definitely quite a bit of redundancy there.
But I don't think it's going to make or break mapster in either case.
Well specifically for maps/projects ignoring the rest for time being.
It would be best for everyone if as many people as possible looked at at each map/project thread. Ideally less sections would be a positive thing for everyone.
I definitely don't think merging Map Feedback and Project Workplace is a good idea at all. If they were combined I wouldn't bother posting projects in there at all. I'd go to General or anywhere else that doesn't say "Looking for feedback."
I go to Project Workplace when I want to see upcoming projects. These people aren't asking me to critique their map, they want me to look at it.
I go to Map Feedback when I'm wanting to help other people make their map better. These people WANT me to look at their map in detail and tell them what could be better.
It makes far more sense to merge Map Review/Feedback.
Outside of that, I don't really see much that needs to be merged. There is a distinct difference between most of the sections that is important to keep, especially for the veterans of each category. I see there being the discussion section and then the reference section for Art/Triggers/Data etc. If you start combining these it would be like combining a storage closet and a tavern. I'd stop going to sections of the forums if you started cluttering the areas I go to discuss with reference material I don't need. Especially if you combined Art (something I frequent all the time despite not posting) with Triggers (something I will probably never look at)
I honestly think that the real problem has to do with the order of things and naming conventions. Social sections should be at the top while reference sections be at the bottom. The only exception being tutorials. Many mappers come to our site for these exclusively.
Revised Order and names:
General
Project Development
The Galaxy Editor
Resources
A reordering of the plan of the city would help navigation for sure
So would taking care of old stickies...