Posted on 10/10/2001 4:10:15 AM PDT by John Robinson
I'm testing a new thread layout. On latest posts, you will see a "beta" link for each article. Click it to read the article in the new thread style.
"Why fix it if it ain't broke?"
Well, it is broken, and it needs to be fixed. The old style Free Republic threads on average consumed 65 kilobytes per view. Multiply that by 600,000 articles served per day and that adds up to a big chunk of bandwidth.
I believe this new format will consume less resources. An eyeball estimate would put that average at about 15-20 kilobytes per view. You may have noticed how bandwidth starved Free Republic has been lately. It's been real slow during the morning. This new software, when fully implemented, should alleviate that problem.
Clean and Mean!
that when the final tally is made regarding
earnest, tireless, heart-felt, sacrificial efforts for good, God and country in our era and spheres of influence--YOURS AND JIM'S WILL SHINE EXCEEDINGLY BRIGHTLY quite above and beyond that of 100's of millions of other people.
"They also serve who stand and wait."
AND YOU DO FAR MORE than standing and waiting. God alone knows the redemptive, FREEDOM FURTHERING actions your efforts have initiated and sustained. . . . and more coming online all the time. . . . perhaps most to remain unknown and unsung in this lifetime. Not everyone you enliven to action gets hereon and crows about it.
THANKS for keeping up the GREAT work.
Really.......I thought perhaps FR was under attack by hackers.......
1. It's great that you have a link to the original posting being replied to. It helps keep track of ongoing conversations, jokes, etc. But - isn't it true that the moderator can yank specific postings? What happens when an intruder posts obnoxious post #3, someoen replies to #3, and the later #3 is yanked? (Just playing devil's advocate).
2. The pagination is very useful, but could probably be confusing. for example, on this thread I see: <<< 1 - 21 - 25 >>> After some playing with it, it seems like it's [page back] + [first page] + [second page] + ... [nth page] + [page forward], but it might be confusing. Since the link to +21 and #30 both go to the same page, I suggest not even including it - I can guarantee people will click on #21, read everything on the page, then click on #25 and wonder why they're still on the same page !! (I've seen it done).
3. While visually I kind of like the old style better (could just be change-aversion), I agree that threds can get pretty long. Keeping simple HTML seems like a good idea. With that in mind, I'd suggest not using tables to align stuff like tha date & "in reply to" right. It inceases the page size & Netscape is brutally slow painting up tables. While I liked the different font faces and styles in the old look, I think minimalism is the way to go. How about just using stylesheets to differentiate the header info form teh body of the post. WE who have good browsers will reap great rewards, and people with cheap old ones will suffer ;^)
4. Also, at the bottom of the page, it might help to separate the content & links asociaed with the last post from the global links - I remeber in my newby days clicking the wrong one a few times. Another thing I find myself doing quite often is refreching the page after reading the last post, in order to see what brilliant remarks come next - but then I have to find my place again. How about a link after the last post that reloads the page & anchors down to that lates post, so I can pick up where I left off? (Or is that why you have the last post as a link in the << 1 - 21 - 25 >>)
I'll leave you alone now - Keep up the great work !!!
this should be helpful to those of us with broadband!
good work John.... load speed is just like chevy horsepower - if more is better, too much is just right.
Also, I think the in reply to #_ link should be on the left side of the page instead of waaaaay over on the right where you have it now.
And the format is just too broken up. Only 20 replys before having to link to another page? One of the best things about FR's format is the fact that we've never had to click from one page to the next in order to read a single thread. I'd really hate to lose that feature. I'd suggest at least 50 replies per thread before we're forced to click to a new page.
Just my humble whine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.