Author Topic: WIP - NSF 2017 Redesign - Now in work, see new thread  (Read 12107 times)

Offline Rei

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • Iceland
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: WIP - NSF 2017 Redesign - Now in work, see new thread
« Reply #20 on: 04/03/2017 08:29 AM »
What categories?
Well the way I figure it, there's a relatively few (4?) themes with which you could categorise the threads in the forum to make it much easier to navigate:

1) By destination object (choose object Moon, Mars, Jupiter, all planetary bodies, etc) or region (LEO, GEO, LLO, SEL2, all orbital regions etc), or leave undefined.

2) By space agency (choose NASA, ESA, JAXA, all government agencies etc), or space company (SpaceX, ULA, Blue Origin, or all private companies, etc) or leave undefined.

3) By scientific objective (astrobiology, solar system/stellar observations, human space flight health, all scientific objectives, etc) or commercial objective (telecommunications, space tourism, asteroid mining, all commercial objectives, etc) or leave undefined.

4) By time period (for real-life historical, current day activities/news, future within planning horizon, far future, all time periods) or popular culture relevance (for polls, discussion of science fiction, and other uncategorised/uncategorisable but relevant material), or leave undefined.

So very in agreement with this. Especially #1. It's so weird, whenever there's a discussion of, say, Venus here. Where does it go? It's almost like the forum encourages us not to talk about it.

If there's some categories that aren't deemed enough significant enough to warrant their own section, it'd be nice to at least have catch-all sections for them. For example, if Pluto wasn't deemed significant enough to warrant a section for itself, I don't think anyone would object to a "KBOs" section. So long as there's somewhere to talk about any space topic of interest  :)

And agreed, that's a very sleek looking redesign!
« Last Edit: 09/26/2017 01:28 PM by Chris Bergin »

Offline seawolfe

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 550
  • South of Seattle and east of Tacoma
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 178
Re: WIP - NSF 2017 Redesign
« Reply #21 on: 05/09/2017 04:10 PM »
I like it but the logo reminds me of THAT Worm logo that EVERYONE hated..... jus' sayin' as there was much discussion about that logo when it existed with NASA.  When the "meatball" logo came back everyone that I heard talk about it couldn't wait for the "meatball".

Offline gosnold

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 890
Re: WIP - NSF 2017 Redesign
« Reply #22 on: 07/05/2017 08:19 PM »
What categories?
Well the way I figure it, there's a relatively few (4?) themes with which you could categorise the threads in the forum to make it much easier to navigate:

1) By destination object (choose object Moon, Mars, Jupiter, all planetary bodies, etc) or region (LEO, GEO, LLO, SEL2, all orbital regions etc), or leave undefined.

2) By space agency (choose NASA, ESA, JAXA, all government agencies etc), or space company (SpaceX, ULA, Blue Origin, or all private companies, etc) or leave undefined.

3) By scientific objective (astrobiology, solar system/stellar observations, human space flight health, all scientific objectives, etc) or commercial objective (telecommunications, space tourism, asteroid mining, all commercial objectives, etc) or leave undefined.

4) By time period (for real-life historical, current day activities/news, future within planning horizon, far future, all time periods) or popular culture relevance (for polls, discussion of science fiction, and other uncategorised/uncategorisable but relevant material), or leave undefined.

So very in agreement with this. Especially #1. It's so weird, whenever there's a discussion of, say, Venus here. Where does it go? It's almost like the forum encourages us not to talk about it.

If there's some categories that aren't deemed enough significant enough to warrant their own section, it'd be nice to at least have catch-all sections for them. For example, if Pluto wasn't deemed significant enough to warrant a section for itself, I don't think anyone would object to a "KBOs" section. So long as there's somewhere to talk about any space topic of interest  :)

And agreed, that's a very sleek looking redesign!

This so much. The current organization by launch vehicle takes away from discussion on payloads and missions. For instance, it's hard to tell when to put a topic in the space science section or in the section corresponding to the launcher. It also means to keep up to date with science missions, or communications missions, one has to read almost all the sections.

Online SkipMorrow

Re: WIP - NSF 2017 Redesign
« Reply #23 on: 07/20/2017 11:24 AM »
I agree so much! Tags are the way to go.

The whole "in which forum should I post this" question is  actually why I dislike the whole forum hierarchy model that pretty much all forums use. Instead, I'm a bigger fan of the tagging system for sites like stackoverflow. You write your post and select at least one tag. For many of the posts here related to missions, you would probably add a tag for vehicle, payload, destination, and launch location, mission number, and perhaps any other unusual aspects such as stage retrieval. It probably does mean a few extra clicks for the OP for each post, but it gets easier with time.

Many of the tags would be standardized in a short period of time, and permissions can be granted to certain users for having the ability to create new tags.

Tags: