Jump to content

Community

AaronP

+Clients
  • Content Count

    105
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About AaronP

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,075 profile views
  1. I registered on the preview site via Facebook and it took like 4 minutes to figure out where it is I could change my username from my real name. Any ability to have username chosen during the social registration process so users who don't want their real name being used can do so, without going on a safari? Also, it automatically takes the user's facebook profile pic and header, again having to figure out where to change all that was a huge pain. I can see people easily being pissed off by that. Would seem much more practical to have those checkbox options during registration than having to dig through settings to enable/disable that.
  2. Is there any released documentation thus far? For example, can we remove the pointless /topic/ section? It's not a directory/leads to nothing - there's no real use for it.
  3. When IPB logs their IP addresses, does it only log registration and post IP's or does/will it log log in IP's and page viewing IP's? Thank you
  4. "Mommmmmm, are we thereeeee yet?" "What about now?" "Are we there yet?" "What about now? Are we there yet?"
  5. I didn't get into forums until 2010 and have never started an IPB forum before so no, I haven't heard of CSEO and don't know what they did differently than IPB. If you change your URL structure naturally you're going to lose traffic instantly. You have to have a way to redirect old links to new ones, probably using 301 redirects so you don't lose any link juice. In Google Webmaster Tools you'll have logs full of spider errors about broken or missing content, otherwise. If you correctly forward visitors/spiders to the new content, your rankings won't be affected and if they are it would be a short term correction followed by an increase in rankings. This is a fact. I've done it before, and Google has instructions on doing it as well. They even have a tool in Webmaster Tools for changing your entire domain name so you can bring your rankings with you if you want/need to change your domain. It's not rocket science, you just have to do it right.
  6. That's pretty much exactly what I expected -- so I can at least be thankful for the honesty. I think you guys are way, way off in the thinking behind URLs and their hierarchy but hey, can't do much about that :sad: Maybe I could pay you guys to develop this and then you could sell it as an extension and make some money! :P
  7. Here's a question for IPS: What sort of testing would I need to have done to at least convince you guys that the proposed URL structure is viable from an "efficiency" standpoint. >Would this be sufficient? If that turned out to be true, would it even be considered or would I be wasting my time? I'd hate to go through the trouble of hiring someone to do something like this to "prove" it, only to find that there'd be no interest in including this as an option in the first place. Can Matt or someone high up tell me whether this would be a waste of time or not? Thanks
  8. You don't take one person's word for it (including mine) that the query result they copy/pasted is engraved in stone. Not only that, you have to compare both the new query structure proposal to the old, under the same circumstances. What I plan on doing: Take a database with 5,000,000 topics and run a script that queries the database. One test using the current query structure and one test using the new query structure. Gradually increasing the queries from 1 per minute until a bottleneck is reached and we can compare the performance of the two. This is more towards determining the viability of the structure than one person doing a query and saying "Ah ha! This one query took this long! See!"
  9. TSP did not demonstrate inefficiency. I provided two examples of large forums: http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ http://wordpress.org/support/ ... that work just fine. The excuse for WordPress's forums are "they must be on super expensive servers to make up for the inefficient queries". Disagreed. Everything should be relevant. And I've said this probably a dozen times: No one is going to force large forum owners to adopt this URL structure. It should be an "option" for those who want to use it. Does anyone here object to me using this structure or anyone else who wants to use it? This isn't an "either or" thing I'm arguing. Nothing wrong with innovation and accommodation.
  10. Yes I sent him an email yesterday and am awaiting a response.
  11. Incidentally, WordPress's forum software is "BBPress" -- their open source forum software. Their "about" section references building it for speed (ironic, maybe you guys should tell them how inefficient their URL queries are). Here's some BBPress forums that handle the "No IDs in URL" structure just fine: http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ (604k topics) http://boards.weddingbee.com/ http://www.econjobrumors.com/ http://www.howtogeek.com/forum/ Here's a duplicate topic from singletrack world: http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/noisy-neighbours-2 Notice how all it does is add the 2?
  12. No need for the sarcasm/mockery.
  13. Could care less about page numbers. They should probably look something like this forum.com/forum-name/topic-name/2/ forum.com/forum-name/topic-name/3/ forum.com/forum-name/topic-name/4/ forum.com/forum-name/topic-name/5/ forum.com/forum-name/topic-name/6/
  14. I like this guy ^ He tests :)
  15. I apologize, I thought you mentioned typo's in your first response which is why I addressed it but I'm mistaken. I was thinking the same thing. And what I do copy/paste, the ending character is a trailing slash and even so, I don't try to copy and drag at the last character. I whip my mouse to the right of the screen well past the last character. Nothing that couldn't be solved by a nice 404 page.
×
×
  • Create New...