Chris Cobler...Are you there?
Chris Cobler...Are you there?
Tags:
Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:32:50 CDT
Viewed 251 times
0 responses 11 comments
Sir: I know you are trying very hard to get that twenty-something demographic, but this new format just stinks. It continues to be a giant step down from what you had and you keep trying to convince us this is better. It is not. They are not going to read the Victoria Advocate, no matter what you do, including texting them the headlines! And since they are not, why don't you go back to YOU ALL writing for the rest of us oldsters, and and we'll keep reading, maybe?
You have killed the discussion forum. The timing was awful. What used to be a place for intelligent and meaningful discussion is now a dumping ground for anything and everything. I have no problem with people who disagree with me, but I do have a problem with having to wade through an advertisement for a local glass cleaner, someone's baby pictures, a BLOG about RenFest, and some cracked pot's diatribe about love. THESE ARE NOT DISCUSSION ISSUES. Unless EVERYONE but me changed their user name, only a few of us are still bothering with it.
You give readers the choice of 10-12 catagories to choose from when they start a post, yet you do not keep the posts in these catagories when they publish on the website. Because you let folks choose where it goes (just like I did to get this here...), we end up with stuff that belongs somewhere else.
Top of the list is always the last posted article, not last posted post.
You cannot see any of the previous posts when you post.
You have posts posted that that nothing there. Why?
I am all about happy events like Eagle Scouts and babies' first trips to the beach. I think good news is wonderful. Why don't you give folks a sections where they can post all of the good news items they can? It would probably be a very popular destination on your site. You don't mind selling them space in your classified ads--give them space here.
As it is, it seems that the Advocate is now being written by the readers. If it wasn't already looking enough like a tabloid instead of a legitimate newspaper, all of this junk is not helping.
If things are going to stay this way, then tell us. If you can possible see any value to considering any of what I have mentioned, then tell us what you are going to do. I'll await your answer.
| Reply or Comment | Send to a Friend | Report a Violation |
If WE have to dig through all of the posts, why shouldn't you?
Difficult you say? It's a pain in the butt.
And you are just bound and determined that we read the blogs, aren't you?
I would like to suggest that you change the name of this website to We Advocate Blogs.
I also will try to keep up with these issues at my blog:
http://community.victoriaad...
Because it's difficult to monitor all of the many discussion threads, I encourage you to contact me directly via my blog with any specific questions. Thanks.
Mr. Cobler--Thanks for your response.
As for web traffic being up with the new site--it is probably because it takes so long find anything, and it is entirely too difficult to manuver about. Peopleare having to try to read/post in several sessions. No one has hours to devote to this endeavor.
Save your blog---I'm not interested in reading blogs. That is why it is so annoying to have them mixed in with the discussion forum.
And, as far as the question I asked, is this going to be corrected, or are we stuck with what we have?
Now, I do believe you have hit the mark with promoting community discussion---people all over the place are talking about how awful and tabloid-like the Advocate has become. You know, the forum was not the only place that we communicated. Some of us actually know each other and talk outside of this format.
Anyway---I think Stevie Wonder, Ray Charles and Roy Orbison, dead or alive, could see this is not an improvement.
Our Web traffic is up by record amounts this month, but that doesn't mean we don't have room for improvement. As Google would say, the site is in beta.
I'll blog more about this later as I get more information from our technical team about what changes are possible along the lines you suggest.
Thank you all--I knew I could not be the only one who is so annoyed by this current format. Chris Cobler, Shawn, Tim, anyone---Kay McHaney---are you out there? ARE YOU LISTENING???
(By the way, it is okay to acknowledge that you goofed and the old way was much better. Lots of us have to try many times to get it right.)
And Shurlee---now you are beginning to scare me! Great minds...
Chris Cobler, you need to visit a message board to see how it is done.
Please give the "happy news" people a location to post their baby pictures on or tell about the latest cookie sale to raise money for neurotic pets. PULEEZE bring back the discussion forum as a separate item in your header.
Littlebluebook hit the mark a number of items that need to be "RE-fixed" including:
-"You give readers the choice of 10-12 catagories to choose from when they start a post, yet you do not keep the posts in these catagories when they publish on the website. Because you let folks choose where it goes (just like I did to get this here...), we end up with stuff that belongs somewhere else.
-"Top of the list is always the last posted article, not last posted post. (This is really annoying!!!!)
-"You cannot see any of the previous posts when you post. (if I'm trying to respond to someone else's post, I have to write my post on a word document,then switch back and forth, and finally cut & paste my post in the comment section - AGGRAVATING AND ANNOYING)
-"You have posts posted that that nothing there. Why?" (And who cares?!?)
Listed topics show the date of the FIRST post, not the last or even the number of posts a given topic has. This FORCES readers to wade through a bunch topics they have may have little interest in - it is, in fact coercive!
I appreciate the fact that you're trying to "improve" the Advocate but this stuff is nonsensical AND boring.
-You have thirteen pages of topics with, at last count, 189 topics over the last 26 days.
-Twenty-nine (29) topics have ZERO comments.
-Eighty (80) topics have only one or two (1 or 2)comments/posts.
-Thats 109 out of 189 topics that most people apparently aren't very interested in, yet they're still on the site, taking up space, including nine (9) topics with zero posts placed on the site between Sept. 29th and Oct. 5th.
A reader looking for topics/forums that are receiving a lot of posts (indicating a good bit of interest) has to scroll back eigth or nine pages to find them, while having to waste time going by posts by proud parents of pictures of their babies - maybe grandma and grandpa think it's terrific that "everybody is so lucky to get a chance to see their darling offspring" - but you know what? WHO CARES!!!
I've played along..... filled out my profile, started a blog, and collected "friends" (there's a peachy-keen idea - this week's winner with the MOST NEW FRIENDS IS......), yadda, yadda, yadda but this new approach is BOORRRIINNGGG!!!!! If I wanted to have a "friends network", I'd go to Facebook or the like.
PLEASE, get on with it or you'll start losing the "regular" posters! Of course, that may be your goal.
