LinuxQuestions.org
Visit the LQ Articles and Editorials section
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

View Poll Results: How social are social groups here at LQ?
They are not social at all and that's fine with me 6 37.50%
They are not social as they could be and I would like that to change 2 12.50%
They are poorly social 3 18.75%
They are totally social 0 0%
I don't care about this 9 56.25%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-17-2011, 04:45 AM   #16
TheIndependentAquarius
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,622
Blog Entries: 29

Rep: Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896

I don't have a reason to give preference to this social group for posting a C/C++ discussion/question thread when the graceful LQ programming section is already there.
In fact I don't think, that the lead programmers here ever do bother to visit those social groups

I feel that this /General section competes with the non-technical social groups.
 
Old 05-17-2011, 04:48 AM   #17
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,398

Rep: Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964
Well I'm a member here too, and everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I personally think there should be a much more specific and clear remit on the forums and leave the rest to better places, like facebook or such like. TBH I often stumble across these peripheral things that I didn't even know existed as they are not used enough. Apparently I have 80 "Links", and I don't know who about 95% of the users are.
 
Old 05-18-2011, 02:01 AM   #18
lumak
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 799
Blog Entries: 32

Rep: Reputation: 109Reputation: 109
It is interesting to see that the social groups are more of a thing to place a tag on your profile page. Why not exploit this with a user ownership concept of social groups.

Example:
Most social groups don't have an icon because the group owner never adds one. So to get an Icon for the whole group, a person could select this to display as their profile icon. It would then be offered to be posted as the icon for the group for other members or upload their own. After a while it would be more likely that a single icon would become the group's icon while still allowing other members to select their own. If their was a group page, the most popular icon would be posted there and it would be seen on the join page.

Not that anybody spends time browsing personal profiles here. That's another odd feature that doesn't quite fit in with LQ. Additionally, some features like posting profile and social group pictures and private messaging doesn't appear till after your 600th post. Apparently to keep the rifraph away. Maybe this should be lowered to 100?

However, I think one of the best features on LQ is the Blogs. Those are usually interesting enough to read randomly. LQ Wiki is great as well, but there are so many other wikis out there and for specific purposes. Actually 90 % of those features in the "Main Menu" I don't even use.

Perhaps upgrading the Social Groups is not high on the list of potential improovment areas. Other features are equally in need of usability.
 
Old 05-18-2011, 05:11 AM   #19
alan_ri
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Croatia
Distribution: Debian GNU/Linux
Posts: 1,733
Blog Entries: 5

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 127Reputation: 127
lumak, you really are the man.

But, lumak, mate, you know what I'm afraid of, not many will understand.

World is a fscked up place.

I'll post again here later.
 
Old 05-18-2011, 05:49 AM   #20
MTK358
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,443
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumak View Post
Most social groups don't have an icon because the group owner never adds one. So to get an Icon for the whole group, a person could select this to display as their profile icon.
Many members don't have a profile icon.

In fact, one of the things I really like about LQ is that it doesn't show avatars by default. Why do social groups have to have an icon, why not just a name?
 
Old 05-18-2011, 07:53 PM   #21
lumak
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 799
Blog Entries: 32

Rep: Reputation: 109Reputation: 109
err correction... not a profile icon, as the GROUP ICON that's displayed on their profile. Watch, click on my profile and you will see 5 groups on the page, but only one has an icon. Anyway, that was just one suggestion to keep some of the social group idea but not really change much.

The problem is that development and implementation for an idea takes so long that it's never going to get done. Even a suggestion for a redesign of the Blog Display page http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/blog/ was ackonwleged as a good idea but was put on a wait list while more important things get done.

As far as profile pictures, they are only displayed on the profile page as far as I can tell... Maybe the friends list as well, I'm not sure.
 
Old 05-19-2011, 05:13 AM   #22
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
No, there's two of us...at least.
Count me in too. I think it's a conspiracy.

As for social groups and blogs, if you're into that there are other better places as stated by many other people above. I don't care for them, or see much point in them. They're just boring and useless.
 
Old 05-19-2011, 01:04 PM   #23
clifford227
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: Slackware 14
Posts: 282

Rep: Reputation: 64
The wife-swapping social group is pretty social, but I dont have a wife so I am only allowed to look through the keyhole
 
Old 05-20-2011, 06:57 AM   #24
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,718

Rep: Reputation: 903Reputation: 903Reputation: 903Reputation: 903Reputation: 903Reputation: 903Reputation: 903Reputation: 903
Quote:
Originally Posted by acid_kewpie View Post
Well I'm a member here too, and everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I personally think there should be a much more specific and clear remit on the forums and leave the rest to better places, like facebook or such like.
How is facebook better for social groups than here? At least here its a small enough organisation that any actions taken by admins and moderators are questionable. Facebook, by its very nature and size doesnt have anything like the amount of flexability that a site like this has.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumak View Post
It is interesting to see that the social groups are more of a thing to place a tag on your profile page. Why not exploit this with a user ownership concept of social groups.

Example:
Most social groups don't have an icon because the group owner never adds one. So to get an Icon for the whole group, a person could select this to display as their profile icon. It would then be offered to be posted as the icon for the group for other members or upload their own. After a while it would be more likely that a single icon would become the group's icon while still allowing other members to select their own. If their was a group page, the most popular icon would be posted there and it would be seen on the join page.
Defacto 'voting' on the social groups? Odd idea, and to be honest I'm still getting my head around exactly what you are proposing here...I guess my headache isnt helping my thinking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumak View Post
Not that anybody spends time browsing personal profiles here. That's another odd feature that doesn't quite fit in with LQ. Additionally, some features like posting profile and social group pictures and private messaging doesn't appear till after your 600th post. Apparently to keep the rifraph away. Maybe this should be lowered to 100?
I dont know exactly how many posts you need to use PMs and posting profile pics, but IIRCs its about 150-200?

I know I've used both features, and I'm well under 600 posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumak View Post
Perhaps upgrading the Social Groups is not high on the list of potential improovment areas. Other features are equally in need of usability.
More likely, 'improving' social groups is out of the admins/mods hands. Aside from possible minor changes like alan_ri's ideas in post #1, there isnt much that the admins/mods can do to make the social groups more usable.

I dont even know how much alan_ris ideas (or yours for that matter lumak) are possible with VBforums, without major modding anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumak View Post
err correction... not a profile icon, as the GROUP ICON that's displayed on their profile. Watch, click on my profile and you will see 5 groups on the page, but only one has an icon. Anyway, that was just one suggestion to keep some of the social group idea but not really change much.
Either that 'missing group icon' pic is from the 'you cant use feature 'x' till you have 'xxx' posts settings applied here, or there are soem very lazy people makign social groups. Just looking at yoru profile lumak, the only group you are a member of that doesnt have an obvious group icon is "C/C++".

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumak View Post
As far as profile pictures, they are only displayed on the profile page as far as I can tell... Maybe the friends list as well, I'm not sure.
It seems like people who have posted a profile pic dont have that profile pic appear in the 'friends' list. I'd guess that with more standard forums the big question mark we have here in the friends list would be filled with the avatar pic of the user. Since we dont have avatars here, you just get a question mark.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 03:17 AM   #25
lumak
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 799
Blog Entries: 32

Rep: Reputation: 109Reputation: 109
From all my computers, only SubGenius has a group icon.

C/C++, Linux Hobbist, Slackware, Tablet PC, have a question mark as do most when browsing the groups.

@ 600 posts
maybe this was already fixed.

@ modifications
If all the LQ server software is opensource, then somebody is capable of modding as much as they want... as time and interest permits.

@ my "odd" ideas
what's your point? I was tossing it out there because nothing is going to be done about any of this anyway. My ideas are to further discussion, nothing more.

Last edited by lumak; 05-21-2011 at 03:22 AM.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 04:43 AM   #26
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,398

Rep: Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964Reputation: 1964
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
How is facebook better for social groups than here? At least here its a small enough organisation that any actions taken by admins and moderators are questionable. Facebook, by its very nature and size doesnt have anything like the amount of flexability that a site like this has.
Plenty of reasons, but evidence is surely good enough. Facebook is massively massively popular, Social Groups are not. I would say that a higher percentage of all internet users have Facebook accounts than LQ members use the social side of the site.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 05:57 AM   #27
Larry Webb
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Crystal Beach, Texas
Distribution: Suse for mail +
Posts: 5,100
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 229Reputation: 229Reputation: 229
Social Groups are a way for a certain type of people to interact and do things that make them feel good about themselves at the time. To them I think they get the same feeling as say you do repairing a down server or building a new computer.

Also most of the members here are interested in one thing, "linux related problems and their solutions". I can see the reaction now if I posted in a LQ Social Group a pic of my neighbors grandchildren or mine. What if I were to post about the "bad gas" I generated from a bowl of beans I consumed yesterday.

I believe if LQ worked hard to make the Social Group thing work it would lose popularity in its Forums and lose the goal it has now.
 
Old 05-22-2011, 08:37 AM   #28
alan_ri
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Croatia
Distribution: Debian GNU/Linux
Posts: 1,733
Blog Entries: 5

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 127Reputation: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Webb View Post
I believe if LQ worked hard to make the Social Group thing work it would lose popularity in its Forums and lose the goal it has now.
But why on Earth they have been made then? Isn't that in contradiction to LQ itself?

I was asked about the point of social groups here. Well, actually, there is no one point, it's that every member of a social group is a point and interaction between them makes social groups valuable, of course how valuable they will be depends on every single point.

I'll post the simplest example; recently I was looking all over the net for some good Debian wallpapers. Now do you think I should've started a new thread in Debian Forum here at LQ about that or if social groups here were more alive, I could've done that there and then exchange few links and/or whatnot. After all, as some have said, technical forums should be technical and I agree with that, to a certain degree, that is.

What's there to be said? Just look at the pool.

Last edited by alan_ri; 05-22-2011 at 08:42 AM.
 
Old 05-22-2011, 08:44 AM   #29
MTK358
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,443
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan_ri View Post
But why on Earth they have been made then?
Maybe they just came with vBulletin (the forum software LQ uses)?
 
Old 05-22-2011, 08:48 AM   #30
alan_ri
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Croatia
Distribution: Debian GNU/Linux
Posts: 1,733
Blog Entries: 5

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 127Reputation: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTK358 View Post
Maybe they just came with vBulletin (the forum software LQ uses)?
If that's the reason why they are here, then that's pathetic.
 
  


Reply

Tags
groups, lq, members, social


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Social networking platform eXo Social released LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-17-2010 07:00 PM
Replies in social groups Jeebizz LQ Suggestions & Feedback 1 08-20-2009 01:55 PM
LQ Social Groups and other extras lumak General 2 12-01-2008 02:39 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration