implemented 15 post per page limit

[z929669]

Over at MyBB boards before we moved to IP Board forums, we had a post/page limit of 10 posts per page. When we moved over to IP Board, this was increased to 20 for about a week and then decreased down to 10 for a few days. Finally, the limit was again increased, but this time up to 15 as a compromise.

 

Having more posts per page allows for more efficiant word searching per page load and it also reults in fewer pages in the topic breadcrumb. However, more posts per page also increases the vertical scrolling 'burden', since the vertical length of each topic page can get quite long, depending on post content. Too many posts also increases page load times, especially on threads with lots of media content (which is pretty common on these forums).

 

 

 

---

Original post by JareX

Hi, when the forum format was changed there were a nice number of post per page (20 I think)

I find annoying to dive into long threads with a lot of pages, and I personally like to have more post per page. (this is my personal opinion thou)

So I woul like to know if there is any way to increase this on the settings (couldn't find an option)

 

If it's not possible to change that only for me, I would like to know the community opinion how this topic, and if they like the way it is or the would like to see more post per page.

 

thanks for this great community

(I'm actually having more fun modding skyrim than playing the game o.O )

[z929669]

Previous forums had a 10 posts/page limit too. This is globally configurble. I recently reduced it from 20, since I found it tedious to scroll so far on every page. Perhaps we could compromise at 15?

[JareX]

I was happy with the 20 post limit. But thats only me, maybe I'm the only one that wish to see more post per page... :/  I think we need more opinions.

[phazer11]

Ten is standard it's a bit annoying how standard it is to be honest. I did like the change of pace when there were twenty, fifteen sounds weird though.

[Nearox]

I'd prefer more than 10 as well, either 15 or 20.

 

Also, there's a higher chance for some posts to get 'lost' to the second-to-last or even third-to-last page within a very short time.

[CJ2311]

IPB devs are silly and decided to remove any kind of user options with version 3.2, so yeah...

 

In 3.1.4 (I think that's the version anyway), it was possible for each user to choose the number of replies per thread, but then IPB admins decided that rather than make a proper system to link individual posts, they'd just make the option global... Idiots.

[EssArrBee]

20 is what I usually use but 15 is a good middle ground. 10 is just to bleeping short.

[z929669]

15 is a fair compromise then. May increase back to 20 later

[z929669]

Raised posts to 15/page

[EssArrBee]

Already better. I just noticed it right now that I'm finally off my phone and I didn't notice that it was any longer to scroll through, but there was just more info. 15 is a good number.

[Uhuru]

Sorry z but reading this forum only you stated a preference for 10.

All who expresed a preference went for 20.

That the user cannot set to their choice is just stupid and a major fail.

Frankly the Nexus and Bethesda Forums are awful.

 

I assumed bad setup choices, obviously the forum software is the problem.

 

Mod Organizer Support came here because forum setup was better and 10 post per page on Nexus was the main problem.

 

It caused posts to be buried pages deep in thread very quickly.

Bethesda method of locking threads after 200 posts is just as bad, the old threads get buried just the same way.

Someone posted 200 post limit was due to bug caused by software.

Nexus has huge threads with same software, so if they can do it all can.

 

Not implying 10 post limit is as bad here because we are not forced into a single thread, that's the main problem with Nexus and Bethesda Forums.

 

Basically 10 posts per page is not a fair compromise.

Just from this topic the consensus is for 20.

I would choose to have more as a personal choice.

Old forum max was 50. I choose max always.

So you vote Min. I vote Max.

Everyone else who voted went for 20.

 

Fair compromise is to go with 20.

suggesting 15 a number no one voted for is a compromise.

More like adding as little as possible to your choice than fair though.

 

The only fair choice is the consensus.

 

Still a monumentally stupid decision, to remove user choice by software makers that caused this problem.

The more I use the new forum the less i like it.

Some things can change like theme, but the core function, not a user choice how to show posts is a big mistake.

Another feature I consider essential that has disappeared is saving drafts of posts.

I find using my phone to format a post almost impossible.

It may be my phone (Galaxy Y). I cannot see Formatting toolbar even using full version of forum. Mobile is even worse with only next or previous page choice.

I only use it at all when working even then only because I'm in range of a free hotspot.

My limited funds are all invested into 60 Meg Broadband (about to go to 100 Meg for same price).

That's the best available in UK only top price from same system giving 100 Meg now and 150 Meg after boost is better than mine.

My PC and 3 monitors suck power using as much or more than everything else combined in an all electric system. The monitors heat half of our flat so heating now costs less but the bill is still much more.

I want the multi screen res of 7680x11440 so to me it's worth it.

Actually even more than eyefinity I require and use all 3 for basic mod management.

Free Commander replaces explorer because it's much better for basic file management having 2 linkable pages and tabs opened across 2 screens and Firefox or Mod Organizer on the 3rd.

Then Game windowed on 1 with whatever tool Needed and Firefox on others.

Never will I go back to 1. But I've got sidetracked here, always get sidetracked.

 

On topic. Save Draft was most useful for switching to my PC for full functions.

My free time is limited and reading forum and writing posts while waiting for next customer is main time I can spend here but must be dropped quickly and without saving draft I will lose posts.

As to new features. So far i see none for forum core functions.

What if anything am I missing?

Will do any required editing later.

[z929669]

Please separate all of your requests into different posts, and please make them brief. This will allow me to give each request attention. You have at least three requests in there (post limit/page, post limit/thread, save draft).

 

use Tapatalk.

 

RE post/page limit, only a handful of people expressed any opinion at all out of more than 3500. EssArrBee and Nearox stated a preference for 15 or 20, Phazer only said 15 was 'wierd'. Only you and JareX have a strong opinion for 20 (or more). This difference is not even a candidate for determination of a real difference. Also, s4n has not chimed in, and his vote has more weight, since he is the backend server admin and webmaster #1. There may be other considerations.

 

I will go back to 20 or even more if that is truly the consensus, but we need more opinions first. More does allow more efficient word search by page.

 

I doubt we will ever have a post limit, unless it becomes a Dbase issue. Check DDSopt and SR threads. they are huge, so if they are performing adequately, then no worries.

[stoppingby4now]

IPB removed the user setting for number of posts per page due to SEO support. If users were able to change the settings individually, links to a particular page that contains a matching post likely won't match. This could be affected by someone copying the URL and passing it on to someone. However, the bigger issue is when dealing with search engines. They would always gain the default, so let's say that was 10. You set your personal preference to 20 (if it were available), and then do a Google search and a link is available to the forum that matches what you searched for that is on page 4 (based on the default of 10). Due to your settings, it would actually be on page 2, and thus the dilemma because the link would either attempt to take you to a page that doesn't yet exist (not enough posts), or would take you to the wrong page entirely.

 

I have no problem with a setting of 20, and there is no technical reason why we can't go higher than 10. 50 is too extreme as a global default.

[z929669]

OK, Just waiting for someone to object to the current 15 ....

[DoubleYou]

Really, I don't find it matters much. 20 did seem like overkill however. 15, what we have now, me likey!

[z929669]

I knew I couldn't be alone in disliking 20+ ;)

 

If we get at least 10 more people expressing a  preference, that would at least be a fair sample, albeit still totally inadequate. I'll post a poll up top.