Matthew
Planet
[AWD:02030716]
Blah
Posts: 471
|
Post by Matthew on Jun 5, 2010 11:55:07 GMT -5
As I'm sure most people don't know, there is a wiki page called DOCUMENTED. It is basiclly, to quote: The linkies is: southpoleofthemoon.com/wiki/index.php?title=DocumentedNow, the debate is this: Some people think new DOCUMENTED's should go to the bottome, some think it should go at the top. The current method is at the bottom, but the people who want it add the new DOCUMENTED's to the top. Now the ovious problems are: The lack of chronilogical order. Now for a while I have been correcting it, but this can get reptitive. So I am setting this up. Which shall we use? @ the bottom: Advantage is not having to reverse the order of everthing, which is loads of time for me. @ the top: Advantage is being able to read new additions at the top, and not having to scroll to the near bottom. So, dicuss and vote please! |
|
|
|
Post by chelseeyuh on Jun 5, 2010 12:08:24 GMT -5
I don't see what the big deal is with having them in chronological order. Yes, in the future it would be nice for all additions to be added to one place, For someone just seeing the page for the first time, I really don't think they'll care that everything is in order. So if we were to start adding everything to the top, it really wouldn't be necessary to reverse the order of the entire page. I think adding to the top might be a little easier, but I really don't care.. it's not like scrolling down is a big deal.. :\
|
|
Helmet
Star
Man Up By Womaning Down
Posts: 567
|
Post by Helmet on Jun 5, 2010 12:20:09 GMT -5
I would go with new stuff at the top, what's wrong about old stuff going down while new stuff goes up?
|
|
Matthew
Planet
[AWD:02030716]
Blah
Posts: 471
|
Post by Matthew on Jun 5, 2010 13:32:42 GMT -5
I see what you mean. I'll consider that if more people back it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 14:01:38 GMT -5
I suggest new stuff goes at the bottom.
Some DOCUMENTEDs might rely on previous ones to be funny, it allows for a better chronological reading, and with a custom title for each it is easy to access the later ones through the table of contents.
|
|
|
|
Post by click3tyclick on Jun 5, 2010 14:11:37 GMT -5
That page became dumb a while ago.
|
|
Matthew
Planet
[AWD:02030716]
Blah
Posts: 471
|
Post by Matthew on Jun 5, 2010 14:18:22 GMT -5
That page became dumb a while ago. It still matters to some of us. |
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453 
|
Post by Gesh on Jun 5, 2010 18:16:12 GMT -5
I vote bottom, because if you're going to go back and read it in chronological order (which I'm assuming is the purpose of having it all documented in the first place - so you can go back and read it), that would be easier and more reasonable to do from top bottom, rather than going to the bottom and working your way up. Besides, scrolling down to read new additions is not a big deal, and this way you won't have to reverse the order of everything that's already there.
|
|
|
|
Post by chelseeyuh on Jun 5, 2010 22:03:39 GMT -5
I vote bottom, because if you're going to go back and read it in chronological order (which I'm assuming is the purpose of having it all documented in the first place - so you can go back and read it) Reading it in chronological order isn't the point of having it. Each entry is just quick, funny excerpt of a conversation. The entries don't rely on each other whatsoever, ergo chronology does not matter. |
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Jun 5, 2010 22:05:40 GMT -5
I vote bottom, because if you're going to go back and read it in chronological order (which I'm assuming is the purpose of having it all documented in the first place - so you can go back and read it) Reading it in chronological order isn't the point of having it. Each entry is just quick, funny excerpt of a conversation. The entries don't rely on each other whatsoever, ergo chronology does not matter. Then why is this debate even going on as to whether new material should be placed at the top or the bottom?  If it truly didn't matter, you could just put new material in wherever you felt like it at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by thequirkyduo on Jun 6, 2010 1:27:35 GMT -5
You can read chronologically from whichever direction you choose - as long as there is a set direction. I personally prefer new posts at the top, because the older post are more likely to have been read already... and the new posts deserve a chance to be appreciated  |
|
Matthew
Planet
[AWD:02030716]
Blah
Posts: 471
|
Post by Matthew on Jun 6, 2010 2:11:55 GMT -5
You can read chronologically from whichever direction you choose - as long as there is a set direction. I personally prefer new posts at the top, because the older post are more likely to have been read already... and the new posts deserve a chance to be appreciated Ok I think at the top has pretty much won here, do I'll go with the mothod I think it was Helmet posted. |
|
Matthew
Planet
[AWD:02030716]
Blah
Posts: 471
|
Post by Matthew on Jun 6, 2010 2:19:36 GMT -5
BTW Admins, please lock this thread.
|
|
