<p>On the main page, it seems to me that the subforums are larger and bolder than the main forums. Also, if you have a forum bookmarked on your control panel, the word "unsubscribe" is larger and bolder than the name of the forum itself. Makes it harder for me to find things and easier to accidentally remove a desired subscription.</p>
<p>I'm disappointed.</p>
<p>Hey, well at least the underscores are gone from this a.m. :)</p>
<p>And now we can see last posters. Yay.</p>
<p>THANK YOU for adding back the last poster :)</p>
<p>Still lots to work on tho!!</p>
<p>So much harder to read! Why such a small font? </p>
<p>I hate it when things change for change's sake. What about the "if it 'aint broke, don't fix it" slogan? How is this new format an improvement?</p>
<pre><code> :(
</code></pre>
<p>I really liked the number of posters posted. Otherwise it's too hard to tell if anything new has been added.</p>
<p>Re: Number of posters on a particular thread. I do agree this can be a useful feature, but see pros and cons to it from the administrator's point of view. Maybe the thought here was to encourage equal time on more topics as opposed to what's been happening lately with a very few topics getting all the posts. Or maybe it's the reverse - that many were turned off by a huge post count in a given topic and didnt want to go through all the messages (raising my hand here). Third possibility is they simply haven't finished with all the upgrades yet! </p>
<p>I'm also experiencing a glitch in that each time I post, the site makes me have to log in all over again, first.</p>
<p>If it ain't broke, don't fix it. So what was broke?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm also experiencing a glitch in that each time I post, the site makes me have to log in all over again, first.
[/quote]
This has happened to me several times. Very annoying! The last time, after I'd pressed the reply button, wrote my reply, got told I wasn't logged in (I was), I logged in and got an "invalid thread" error message. It's a mess.</p>
<p>Not very fond of the changes -- too hard to read and less information. Any changes that make something less user friendly are a disappointment.</p>
<p>too small. too hard to read.</p>
<p>Me too. I don't like change anyway, but if you're gonna do it, make it better. This isn't.</p>
<p>I'm glad to see the "last poster" back!</p>
<p>Yeah me 2 :D</p>
<p>Everyone, in order to find out how many replies and views, i discovered all you have to do is scroll your mouse over the gray boxes under the last post column. With that said, hopefully it can be changed to the previous format, as this was a major downgrade.</p>
<p>OOOK i get it - float mouse over last posters name and wallaaa - I can handle that.</p>
<p>Question here - wouldn't it have been nice to have a post put up with simple explanation of the new how-to's?? simple!! :)</p>
<p>Main page fonts could still be bigger tho!!</p>
<p>Yea! "Last poster" is back - That was a quick fix:)</p>
<p>Now, I can only post on this thread by clicking POST REPLY to a previous message. Clicking on REPLY does not allow me to post unless I go down to the message box. The formatting tools (such as smilies, font size) have disappeared. I am a Netscape user.</p>
<p>This is so lame. I still can't read the titles of my PM's. And when I try to preview a PM or a post, I need a magnifying glass. (Unfortunately I cannot clip one of those to my screen.) Gee thanks so much. Was all set to continue a PM conversation with someone. And what's the purpose of the extended white space, when I would like to see Number of Views & Number of Replies, as others would. I agree with ASAP. No reason for this. Stupid. Just stupid.</p>
<p>I see the views & posts feature now....still don't like it though, because its one at a time. Guess I used that listing feature more than I thought (as I am truly missing it now) to prioritize what I read in each forum. For instance, if I wanted to skim through responses to interestingly worded threads, I'd scroll down the list & hit those threads with only a bunch of replies, rather than just a few....can't do that now, except with the time-consuming one-at-a-time method.</p>