Steve,
I know it has been brought up before, and I realise it must see terribly ungrateful to ask given the work and resources that go into keeping Target Talk on the air, but since every time I load the Target Talk webpage it means a 1.3Mb download, I think perhaps it's time to seriously ask:
Can Target Talk be converted to a more up-to-date form of forum software?
There are several free software forums out there, and http://www.stirton.com shows how at least one would look when used for target shooting discussion. And it offers N advantages over the current setup:
1) It's more aesthetically pleasing;
2) It allows conversations on a topic to continue for longer than here (because here they scroll off the bottom of the screen and are forgotten);
3) It allows for a "check new posts" button which would reduce the download needed to examine what had been posted since your last visit;
4) It gathers more data regarding how many posters and readers you have;
5) It allows for advertising to be used to defray costs;
6) It allows for automatic swear-word censoring;
7) It allows for posters to use italics/boldface/etc. to denote emphasis and other such devices to increase the ability of the poster to express their point more clearly;
8) It allows for rapid searching of past posts instead of hoping someone's added those posts to the archive here;
9) It allows you to seperate discussions into general categories (pistol/rifle/general politics/etc) and to assign different people to moderate those categories, thus reducing workload;
10) There is a wider support community for many of these boards, which means that any modifications you could wish for have probably already been written by someone else.
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49116.0
Perhaps it's time to update Target Talk's presentation mecha
Moderators: rexifelis, pilkguns
-
Bob LeDoux
Forget This Crap
I've been a contributor to this page since its inception. I read it at least once daily.
It works well, and I see no reason to change it, especially since it is an ancillary service provided by a small business owner.
If we had 3000 participants, many posting daily, I might agree with you, but we don't. We have a small number of participants. There is nothing to be gained by "treeing" the contents. That means spending more effort to get through individual layers, with little benefit.
On my system, the contents load progressively. I can see the most recent threads, instantly, and select them as desired, without waiting for the entire content to load.
If you start giving me pop up adverts, I'll quit coming. I avoid Yahoo groups like a plague. The last thing we need is more "bells and whistles." People who still use dialup modems deserve that much.
Take your sell someplace else. There's no reason for us to line your pockets.
.49126.49116
It works well, and I see no reason to change it, especially since it is an ancillary service provided by a small business owner.
If we had 3000 participants, many posting daily, I might agree with you, but we don't. We have a small number of participants. There is nothing to be gained by "treeing" the contents. That means spending more effort to get through individual layers, with little benefit.
On my system, the contents load progressively. I can see the most recent threads, instantly, and select them as desired, without waiting for the entire content to load.
If you start giving me pop up adverts, I'll quit coming. I avoid Yahoo groups like a plague. The last thing we need is more "bells and whistles." People who still use dialup modems deserve that much.
Take your sell someplace else. There's no reason for us to line your pockets.
.49126.49116
-
Bob LeDoux
Pardon My Jargon
Readers, Excuse my choice of words.
Scott does us a service by providing this page. The last thing we need is others "voluntering" him to do more.
.49127.49126
Scott does us a service by providing this page. The last thing we need is others "voluntering" him to do more.
.49127.49126
-
David Levene
Re: Forget This Crap
: Take your sell someplace else. There's no reason for us to line your pockets.
Actually I think you will find that Mark is still at University. He was not trying to sell anything, just making suggestions fow what he sees as possible improvements with a link to an example of an alternative format.
Is that such a crime.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.49129.49126
Actually I think you will find that Mark is still at University. He was not trying to sell anything, just making suggestions fow what he sees as possible improvements with a link to an example of an alternative format.
Is that such a crime.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.49129.49126
-
geo. anderson
"terribly ungrateful to ask"
Yes. Especially since from your email domain name suffix I suspect that you are not spending any money with our hosts.
The most polite construction that can be put on a post like this is to say that it insults our hosts' intelligence. Do you think that Scott and Warren are such dimwits that they are not aware of software alternatives?
Another construction might be that this post highlights the author's arrogance. Do you think you are the only person who can make a list of ten software features? Or that it is of #1 importance that you be aesthetically pleased?
A third construction is that the post infers that the users here are so stupid that they won't recognize a veiled attempt to promote another board.
Actually, I share Bob's sentiment as expressed in the subject line of his first post. No pardon needed, Bob.
Geo. Anderson
george-at-willowlane.net.49130.49116
The most polite construction that can be put on a post like this is to say that it insults our hosts' intelligence. Do you think that Scott and Warren are such dimwits that they are not aware of software alternatives?
Another construction might be that this post highlights the author's arrogance. Do you think you are the only person who can make a list of ten software features? Or that it is of #1 importance that you be aesthetically pleased?
A third construction is that the post infers that the users here are so stupid that they won't recognize a veiled attempt to promote another board.
Actually, I share Bob's sentiment as expressed in the subject line of his first post. No pardon needed, Bob.
Geo. Anderson
george-at-willowlane.net.49130.49116
-
Bob LeDoux
Re: Forget This Crap
Its still an "I volunter you" scenario.
My concern is that changes require more bandwidth, and result in slower access. His ideas have merit for a large population of readers with high speed access.
Many rural readers are still on dialup, and our readership is quite small.
Use the same basis we use in selecting our target guns: simple reliable systems instead of bells and whistles.
.49131.49129
My concern is that changes require more bandwidth, and result in slower access. His ideas have merit for a large population of readers with high speed access.
Many rural readers are still on dialup, and our readership is quite small.
Use the same basis we use in selecting our target guns: simple reliable systems instead of bells and whistles.
.49131.49129
-
HBP
Jeez, the guy was only making a suggestion! . . .
Talk about shooting the messanger! (pun intended)
The guy's only re-affirming a point which has been made before. I'm sure Pilkguns would prefer constructive feedback as opposed to numbing silence.
. . . and George, since when is a non-USA eMail address a sign of not supporting the sponsor? Is this a US-only website? Are only US-ian comments recognised? Lighten up.
Regards, HBP
.49133.49116
The guy's only re-affirming a point which has been made before. I'm sure Pilkguns would prefer constructive feedback as opposed to numbing silence.
. . . and George, since when is a non-USA eMail address a sign of not supporting the sponsor? Is this a US-only website? Are only US-ian comments recognised? Lighten up.
Regards, HBP
.49133.49116
-
David Levene
Re: Forget This Crap
: My concern is that changes require more bandwidth, and result in slower access. His ideas have merit for a large population of readers with high speed access.
I have no preference either way, but then I am lucky enough to have a 2meg connection at home.
I do remember that, back in my days of dial-up, I did have one system, running the then latest IE, which insisted on downloading the whole page before displaying anything. There was no obvious reason for it, it just happened.
There are times when I access both this board and the Stirton forum (which Mark quoted) using a mini-notebook equipped with a cellular telephone card (GPRS). The reported speed is a bit faster than a V92 dial-up. Using this kit the Stirton forum is much faster.
I do agree with you, the Pilk crew do a great job in providing TT. That doesn't man though that suggestions for possible "improvements" should be stifled.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.49135.49131
I have no preference either way, but then I am lucky enough to have a 2meg connection at home.
I do remember that, back in my days of dial-up, I did have one system, running the then latest IE, which insisted on downloading the whole page before displaying anything. There was no obvious reason for it, it just happened.
There are times when I access both this board and the Stirton forum (which Mark quoted) using a mini-notebook equipped with a cellular telephone card (GPRS). The reported speed is a bit faster than a V92 dial-up. Using this kit the Stirton forum is much faster.
I do agree with you, the Pilk crew do a great job in providing TT. That doesn't man though that suggestions for possible "improvements" should be stifled.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.49135.49131
-
Mark Dennehy
Re: "terribly ungrateful to ask"
Wow. Well, that put me in my place, yessiree bob, so it did. I've been well and truly spanked in public so I have.
I'll put this as politely as I can - I'm going to assume that you don't speak for Steve, since he's polite and you are... not.
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49140.49130
I'll put this as politely as I can - I'm going to assume that you don't speak for Steve, since he's polite and you are... not.
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49140.49130
-
Mark Dennehy
Re: Forget This Crap
: Its still an "I volunter you" scenario.
True, but what would you have me do? Ask politely if Steve has considered upgrading the format, or start my own and post here saying I had a better alternative? The latter strikes me as being not only somewhat odd, given that I'm not in the US, but highly rude, given that I'd be posting the notice here...
: My concern is that changes require more bandwidth, and result in slower access. His ideas have merit for a large population of readers with high speed access.
Actually, given that the current page is a 1.4Mb download, and that there's no reason that the alternative has to be heavy on graphics, my proposal results in a reduction of bandwidth usage, not an increase.
That's the reason I suggested it in the first place.
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49141.49131
True, but what would you have me do? Ask politely if Steve has considered upgrading the format, or start my own and post here saying I had a better alternative? The latter strikes me as being not only somewhat odd, given that I'm not in the US, but highly rude, given that I'd be posting the notice here...
: My concern is that changes require more bandwidth, and result in slower access. His ideas have merit for a large population of readers with high speed access.
Actually, given that the current page is a 1.4Mb download, and that there's no reason that the alternative has to be heavy on graphics, my proposal results in a reduction of bandwidth usage, not an increase.
That's the reason I suggested it in the first place.
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49141.49131
-
Len
Some good points
I sort of like a format where the newest topic bumps to the top. I don't know if the traffic here dictates different sub categories...as the general topic seems to be match or competition talk anyway.
It would be nice to see back to the bingining of time or have a better search...but is it worth the hassle, probably not.
I'd kick in $5 to help support the cause...heck I remember when this thing was being run on an Apply, before Scott took it over...man then it was really slow.
.49143.49116
It would be nice to see back to the bingining of time or have a better search...but is it worth the hassle, probably not.
I'd kick in $5 to help support the cause...heck I remember when this thing was being run on an Apply, before Scott took it over...man then it was really slow.
.49143.49116
-
Roland Cannon
Re: Forget This Crap
I like this was. It reminds me of the old Airgunletter site. It brings back fond memories of giving the Gaylords the business!
Honestly, I dont care how the information here gets to me. It is so good it could be carved on a rock.
.49145.49135
Honestly, I dont care how the information here gets to me. It is so good it could be carved on a rock.
.49145.49135
-
Len
RC you rabble rowser
The color is all wrong...it has to be yellow and you would have to be banned!
I could send you a legal notice to cease and desist if you would like...that might make you happy again! ;-)
.49148.49145
I could send you a legal notice to cease and desist if you would like...that might make you happy again! ;-)
.49148.49145
-
Mark Dennehy
Re: Some good points
: I'd kick in $5 to help support the cause...
And I'd add 5 euro to that, whatever that comes to nowadays :D
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49151.49143
And I'd add 5 euro to that, whatever that comes to nowadays :D
mark.dennehy-at-cs.tcd.ie.49151.49143
-
tj
Re: "terribly ungrateful to ask"
Wow! About all I can offer is:
Geo. Anderson, you sir are an idiot!
Nuff said!
: Yes. Especially since from your email domain name suffix I suspect that you are not spending any money with our hosts.
: The most polite construction that can be put on a post like this is to say that it insults our hosts' intelligence. Do you think that Scott and Warren are such dimwits that they are not aware of software alternatives?
: Another construction might be that this post highlights the author's arrogance. Do you think you are the only person who can make a list of ten software features? Or that it is of #1 importance that you be aesthetically pleased?
: A third construction is that the post infers that the users here are so stupid that they won't recognize a veiled attempt to promote another board.
: Actually, I share Bob's sentiment as expressed in the subject line of his first post. No pardon needed, Bob.
: Geo. Anderson
shootingsports-at-ev1.net.49157.49130
Geo. Anderson, you sir are an idiot!
Nuff said!
: Yes. Especially since from your email domain name suffix I suspect that you are not spending any money with our hosts.
: The most polite construction that can be put on a post like this is to say that it insults our hosts' intelligence. Do you think that Scott and Warren are such dimwits that they are not aware of software alternatives?
: Another construction might be that this post highlights the author's arrogance. Do you think you are the only person who can make a list of ten software features? Or that it is of #1 importance that you be aesthetically pleased?
: A third construction is that the post infers that the users here are so stupid that they won't recognize a veiled attempt to promote another board.
: Actually, I share Bob's sentiment as expressed in the subject line of his first post. No pardon needed, Bob.
: Geo. Anderson
shootingsports-at-ev1.net.49157.49130
-
Walt
Re: Perhaps it's time to update Target Talk's presentation m
I have an open wireless in my neighborhood somewhere. It loads in less than 10 seconds.
If I use my dialup with explorer it takes about 3 minutes,and if I use safari on dailup it takes about 40 seconds. 40 seconds is no problem.
.49159.49116
If I use my dialup with explorer it takes about 3 minutes,and if I use safari on dailup it takes about 40 seconds. 40 seconds is no problem.
.49159.49116
-
Bill Dutton
Re: Perhaps it's time to update Target Talk's presentation m
I frequent many message boards (not just shooting sports ones). While the content posted on this site is A#1 top notch stuff, I visit other boards more often because they are able to present the information in a way that is well organized and presented.
The format of TargetTalk serves it purpose nicely but an upgrade would be a change for the better.
I believe the harsh tone that others have given the original poster for what I thought was a well thought out and friendly suggestion was unwarrented.
To see a well presented message board on shooting related stuff check out http://www.1911forum.com/.
bill.dutton-at-fmr.com.49161.49116
The format of TargetTalk serves it purpose nicely but an upgrade would be a change for the better.
I believe the harsh tone that others have given the original poster for what I thought was a well thought out and friendly suggestion was unwarrented.
To see a well presented message board on shooting related stuff check out http://www.1911forum.com/.
bill.dutton-at-fmr.com.49161.49116
-
Bill Dutton
Re: Perhaps it's time to update Target Talk's presentation m
PS: I use a high speed DSL connection and this page takes 20 seconds to load.
The 1911forum.com general discussions forum takes 4 seconds to load.
Food for though.
bill.dutton-at-fmr.com.49162.49161
The 1911forum.com general discussions forum takes 4 seconds to load.
Food for though.
bill.dutton-at-fmr.com.49162.49161
-
Bob LeDoux
I am Confused
When I "click" on this bbs, it starts to load, and it takes about 3 minutes to load to the end. (I am on dialup, in a rural area, without cable access.) However, the most recent entries appear in about 3 seconds. But, since I visit this site daily, I don't need to go, to the end.
Are you saying you have to wait for the whole thing to load before you see anything? If so, you have a valid complaint. But I think you should look at your browser options. Make certain it is set to display while it is loading. All the rectn stuff loads first on this bbs.
I like the fact that the jpeg files are few. On some sites, the pictures are frosting that add little if any, to the content. Rolling smiley faces and jpeg respondent ID's are a waste of bandwidth, and loading time.
Regarding the nice 1911 webpages: there are a thousand times as many people interested in the Colt. That level of interest warrents a breakout by categories.
Only a few people are interested in ISSF shooting. Why should we have to select different pages for shooting techniques, competition rifles, air pistols, beginner's air pistols, etc., when most of these pages won't even have a single posting per day?
Scott has done a good job of condensing the historical posts into an archive. There are a few threads I have printed out over the past five years, he has not included. But the major points are well treated.
I just don't want this efficient page to turn into a bloated site, like so many others. I don't want to see popup ad's for Morini's much less digital cameras. (I look at the Morini 84 ad enough times as it is.) Thank you, Scott.
That's my say; sorry if I came across strong. I'm just tired of more bells and whistles as always being sold as the answer to our problems.
.49163.49116
Are you saying you have to wait for the whole thing to load before you see anything? If so, you have a valid complaint. But I think you should look at your browser options. Make certain it is set to display while it is loading. All the rectn stuff loads first on this bbs.
I like the fact that the jpeg files are few. On some sites, the pictures are frosting that add little if any, to the content. Rolling smiley faces and jpeg respondent ID's are a waste of bandwidth, and loading time.
Regarding the nice 1911 webpages: there are a thousand times as many people interested in the Colt. That level of interest warrents a breakout by categories.
Only a few people are interested in ISSF shooting. Why should we have to select different pages for shooting techniques, competition rifles, air pistols, beginner's air pistols, etc., when most of these pages won't even have a single posting per day?
Scott has done a good job of condensing the historical posts into an archive. There are a few threads I have printed out over the past five years, he has not included. But the major points are well treated.
I just don't want this efficient page to turn into a bloated site, like so many others. I don't want to see popup ad's for Morini's much less digital cameras. (I look at the Morini 84 ad enough times as it is.) Thank you, Scott.
That's my say; sorry if I came across strong. I'm just tired of more bells and whistles as always being sold as the answer to our problems.
.49163.49116
-
Mark
Re: Perhaps it's time to update Target Talk's presentation m
I know Scott or somebody said no on the topic of upgrading before, but I'll second the idea again anyway. And I'd be willing to kick in US$5-10 too.
Oh, and Geo. Anderson:
You're comments were rude and uncalled for. The guy was just making a polite suggestion...lighten up.
: Steve,
: I know it has been brought up before, and I realise it must see terribly ungrateful to ask given the work and resources that go into keeping Target Talk on the air, but since every time I load the Target Talk webpage it means a 1.3Mb download, I think perhaps it's time to seriously ask:
: Can Target Talk be converted to a more up-to-date form of forum software?
: There are several free software forums out there, and http://www.stirton.com shows how at least one would look when used for target shooting discussion. And it offers N advantages over the current setup:
: 1) It's more aesthetically pleasing;
: 2) It allows conversations on a topic to continue for longer than here (because here they scroll off the bottom of the screen and are forgotten);
: 3) It allows for a "check new posts" button which would reduce the download needed to examine what had been posted since your last visit;
: 4) It gathers more data regarding how many posters and readers you have;
: 5) It allows for advertising to be used to defray costs;
: 6) It allows for automatic swear-word censoring;
: 7) It allows for posters to use italics/boldface/etc. to denote emphasis and other such devices to increase the ability of the poster to express their point more clearly;
: 8) It allows for rapid searching of past posts instead of hoping someone's added those posts to the archive here;
: 9) It allows you to seperate discussions into general categories (pistol/rifle/general politics/etc) and to assign different people to moderate those categories, thus reducing workload;
: 10) There is a wider support community for many of these boards, which means that any modifications you could wish for have probably already been written by someone else.
.49173.49116
Oh, and Geo. Anderson:
You're comments were rude and uncalled for. The guy was just making a polite suggestion...lighten up.
: Steve,
: I know it has been brought up before, and I realise it must see terribly ungrateful to ask given the work and resources that go into keeping Target Talk on the air, but since every time I load the Target Talk webpage it means a 1.3Mb download, I think perhaps it's time to seriously ask:
: Can Target Talk be converted to a more up-to-date form of forum software?
: There are several free software forums out there, and http://www.stirton.com shows how at least one would look when used for target shooting discussion. And it offers N advantages over the current setup:
: 1) It's more aesthetically pleasing;
: 2) It allows conversations on a topic to continue for longer than here (because here they scroll off the bottom of the screen and are forgotten);
: 3) It allows for a "check new posts" button which would reduce the download needed to examine what had been posted since your last visit;
: 4) It gathers more data regarding how many posters and readers you have;
: 5) It allows for advertising to be used to defray costs;
: 6) It allows for automatic swear-word censoring;
: 7) It allows for posters to use italics/boldface/etc. to denote emphasis and other such devices to increase the ability of the poster to express their point more clearly;
: 8) It allows for rapid searching of past posts instead of hoping someone's added those posts to the archive here;
: 9) It allows you to seperate discussions into general categories (pistol/rifle/general politics/etc) and to assign different people to moderate those categories, thus reducing workload;
: 10) There is a wider support community for many of these boards, which means that any modifications you could wish for have probably already been written by someone else.
.49173.49116