On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:34:41 -0000, lucasgabd
<
luabd...@gmail.com.nospam.com> wrote:
> Well, about those links you send, two of them are offline.
I repeat what I wrote in my last post :-
>> [...] The last two links are
>> an excellent example of what happens you are fooled into believing that
>> the nature of a forum is more important than its users and its content.
They're dead for a reason.
<snip>
> I agree with you that users and content are the most important thing in
> the forum.
> But why we have two forums with "one-prop subject" that works and not a
> general or just toss juggling one that does it too?
Yes, there are lots of BB-type forums, for diabolo, yo-yo, kendama, poi,
unicycling, etc. Yes, they are successful.
And there are juggling forums too, as we already know. And they are to a
greater or lesser degree not successful.
> (ok, this forum works well, I think. But the interface is not really
> friendly)
This forum works, and has done for two decades, because it is
content-driven. The forums I cited do not possess the richness and variety
of content that r.j continues to enjoy. If you find the interface
unfriendly then get another interface. Have you tried a standalone or
browser-based newsreader? The IJDb news portal? Google groups reader? If
you dislike those, then write your own interface - the data is there, you
have many choices about how you view it.
I've been hanging around r.j for about thirteen years now, and have seen
countless demands for BB-type forums come and go. Nothing I am aware of
has yet gained a toehold. This does not make it impossible, but it is
evidence that the shortcomings of a simple USENET interface do not come
close to outweighing the richness of the content that can be found here.