Time to roll back to previous forum?
Comments
-
Have you tried replacing the correct information with some gobbledegook?
1 -
To all those complaining that the new text is too hard to read it sounds like you need to adjust your screen resolution and/or font size as I have done. If you use Chrome it is a simple matter of clicking on the 3 dots on the extreme right of the top search bar and scrolling down the menu for Settings, then Advanced settings and Web Content let's you set the font size, I have mine on medium and it is perfectly readable, I have no idea why anyone would want the small let alone the very small settings
Alison
1 -
Myself and two friends set up a better website and we invited 9 others to make a dozen folk to stress test. For 10 days or so before inviting members we ironed out bugs and improved usability and visibility for visualy challenged. Did not take much tweaking once opened for business. OK more user friendly than this one but to view the initial offering it looks as if no testing, nor questioning, nor deep thought and considerationhad gone into it. Incidently among the dozen testers we knew that one had site problems and another was very poor sighted and registered blind. Just a thought.
0 -
But the testing is being done on here now by everyone who might be interested. Only then will the CC see snags and omissions. Constructive input is of course the key to helping the site emerge as it should. This is day three, I expect it will take quite a while to iron out problems for users.
1 -
A positive suggestion which may help others:
My biggest bugbear was reading a few threads without logging in, then deciding I wanted to reply to one, and finding that after logging in I was back to the front page again. Then I needed to go back through the sequence of getting to the post I wanted to answer - not easy if it's the last post in a long thread.
I've now found a 'fix' for this, in that if I'm not logged in and want to reply I just 'Like' a post, then go to the Login button, login and I'm taken back to where I started, at the correct place at the post I want to reply to, even if it is right at the end of a very long thread.
So, if anyone wonders why I have become such a 'Liker' it's not to gain popularity but to make it easier to use this forum!
0 -
And after you have replied can then you can unlike the first one Val. Neat.
1 -
I used your word "testing" EasyT but I regard this roll out as the only way that the CC can really see if people are able to use it successfully, iron out flaws, improve user participation and site function etc. It's quite an egalitarian way to do it. We could be in the situation of being presented with a finished product, no ifs or buts. But we're not and we're lucky to have some input and participation in this website.
3 -
Most of the flaws should have been ironed out using guiea pigs amongst existing members willing to take part in ironong out basic flaws. As I also said it is good manners.
Taking folk for granted is something that I personally consider to be very poor form!
1 -
It's still letting me Like all my own posts. What a stupid forum!
5 -
CC should not have published a web site with so many bugs. Testing should have taken place to identify issues and resolve them before going live. CC should have employed professional testers to go through the site and check that every link, facility and item worked as required. It does not require anyone with specific caravanning experience to do this.
To say that it is OK to publish a web site like this, with so many bugs, is like saying that it is OK to have hot water coming out of the cold pipe in your new house and leaving it up to the new home owners to identify the problem.
Those on here saying give the site time to bed in, and that the problems are just teething problems, wouldn't be saying the same to the builder of the above house!
IT professionals should get it right the first time just like any other service provider such as builder or car manufacturer.
2 -
Its not the odd obscure bug requiring correction that is infuriating people. It is the self-evident total lack of foresight and planning resulting in the most basic of errors that we are having to endure.
2 -
Yes there are some bugs, but it is not the end of the world. In general, after 3 days use I find the site an improvement on the old one, which folk were constantly moaning about. Perhaps it is not the best way to do things, but we have been given a new site and the opportunity to constuctively comment and help improve things. I for one think this is the best way forward, rather than constant and sometimes unpleasant criticism.
4 -
A couple of years ago, the Scout Association, (a somewhat bigger organisation than the CC), launched a new IT system for nationally keeping records. This was to be used by Scout groups themselves, not just head office. However, when a fairly major glitch was found in the system by Scout leaders using it the Association had the good grace to quickly take the system down again until everything was sorted. This took well over a year to get everything right but was thoroughly re-tested by many actual users before it was re-launched as a live system.
0 -
I have to agree with Steve L. I found the new site very cumbersome and slow to start with but now, after trying things for 2 or 3 days, I think it is a distinct improvement on the old one. In particular the ability to add photos easily is great and the spell checker seems to work. Those were two of the major grumbles with the old forum and they've been sorted out.
OK it's not perfect and t's not as easy to use as some other forums, but if the glitches are now sorted out as soon as they're reported, it's heading in the right direction. Personally, I can't see the point in reverting to the old site which attracted so many complaints so often!
3 -
So you would prefer us to be without a site at all for an unspecified (long) term just because you don't want to help with suggestions for improvements? That sounds a tad selfish to me and hardly practical for the Club after all this site is not just a forum, would you have them take down the whole booking system too
Alison
1 -
The trouble is that many of the reported issues are platform specific.
If I use the site on my PC using chrome it's pretty good. If I use it on my iPhone with safari it's dreadful.
So I tend to think that the basic framework is there.
Bit more testing with various browsers wouldn't hurt but there's so many out there I'd go for the common ones.
0 -
That might be one of the the main issues JayEss and also whether the devices are up to date etc. Our Android phones certainly don't have the latest advancements on them and this is where I can see problems occurring (I think) it would be good to get some technical advice on this.
0 -
It does not do that on the iPad brue. However, if you miss spell it does suggest alternatives, which you can accept or reject. Not infallible, but if you miss something and when reading through, think that does not look right. If touched a wrongly spelled word is highlighted in pink and alternatives suggested.
It did do all this on the old version, but some of the things it came up with were incredible. Now it is 100% better.
I also really like that it puts an apostrophe in automatically, for things like don't, as on the iPad this used to involve calling up a second keyboard.
0 -
I believe that all new software implementations should be thoroughly tested and passed as meeting the required criteria for use by the customer base. No matter what platform the customers are using to access the software.
In this, the new CC software has been considered by most members on here as disappointing.
Nothing will change. The CC has the system it wants, has planned for and has implemented. The customers will just have to live with it -----OR --------Use the CC Facebook option, A cynic might say that was the plan all along, but I don't subscribe to that theory.
No doubt with a bit of workaround which CC forum members are familiar with from the old forum this new software will be equally useable. So the future is not so bad, it ain't worth worrying about.
Cheers........................K
0 -
No, Alison, I've not said that at all. The OP refers to reverting back to the existing forum platform which is what I agree with. I haven't said anything about not helping with suggestions or improvements, I don't know where you have got that from, and I haven't referred to the whole site so, I'm sorry but I don't know where you are coming from. Perhaps you should read my post again. What I'm saying is that the new forum should have been tested by end users before it went live and that the CC should now have the grace to take it down, get it fixed, with testing by end users, us the membership, then re-launch it. Meantime, as suggested by the OP, revert back to the original forum.
1
