This is NOT the Elders Quorum: fixing the Misperception of Utah By 5

[jrj84105]

I'm not the expert, but I don't think that VBulletin allows that level of customization.

Are you only navigating the site using the What's New or Activity Stream screen? It will show the most recent activity by post at the top, regardless of the category or thread it was posted in. I always click on the New Post link in the top menu, and it takes me to a page where I can see a list of threads with activity since I last reviewed them. That way, I can pick and choose which topics/threads I want to waste spend time looking at, and ignore the other threads (e.g anything to do with baseball and hockey). That way, I have only myself to blame if I end up spending wasting time reading posts in a thread I don't want to read.

That's exactly how I browse, and what I think is a serious limitation of this board. The number of political and religious threads that occupy what's new and the activity stream are going to cause the majority of visitors to immediately nope out.

What I suggested and ultimately built was an active thread that filters out the religious, BYU, and political topics. The home page also has a New Threads list that lets you see new topics that aren't buried in active threads. The BYU, Religion, Politics, and Pissing&Moaning category is called the Cesspool and is members only. Although the cesspool is eliminated from activity threads, if you participate any activity will show up in your personal followed4 threads.

if this kind of customization isn't available on vBulletin, I think it would be well worth looking at other products.

[LA Ute]

We changed the startup page to push people toward clicking on "New Posts." Maybe that hasn't solved the problem. I'm all in favor of ways to avoid misperceptions. U-Ute: Have at it! You'll get a little something extra in your paycheck next week if you solve this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocker Ute]

Do things actually need to change here though? Maybe because I use Tapatalk the majority of the time I don't see the issue, but I can view this site however I want. I can only see posts I've participated in, I can watch all new posts, I can watch only subjects I've subscribed to or whatever else.

The proboards.com platform really doesn't seem all that different from vbulletin and no offense but the uofuboard.com design looks dated to me already. Maybe that is my aversion to mid 2000 icons.

I'm all for being welcoming. Maybe we do put the politics and church talk behind the registration wall, but I think the only result will be making this board look inactive. No pun intended.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jrj84105]

We changed the startup page to push people toward clicking on "New Posts." Maybe that hasn't solved the problem. I'm all in favor of ways to avoid misperceptions. U-Ute: Have at it! You'll get a little something extra in your paycheck next week if you solve this.

Those views are still typically 30-40% religion/politics with a much higher proportion once basketball and football recruiting seasons end. It's easy to remove those topics from the new posts and active threads views on the Proboards product. Not sure about vBulletin.

[LA Ute]

Those views are still typically 30-40% religion/politics with a much higher proportion once basketball and football recruiting seasons end. It's easy to remove those topics from the new posts and active threads views on the Proboards product. Not sure about vBulletin.

Serious question: Please forgive me if I've missed this already, which may well have happened. On Tapatalk, I look at the "New Posts" option just to see what has recently been posted. I almost always skip most topics, including politics, believe it or not. As Rocker notes, I could set my page so I see only threads I've participated in or subscribed to. Are you saying that the format is confusing so that new users do not take that approach and get turned off by an apparent imbalance in topics?

[chrisrenrut]

Serious question: Please forgive me if I've missed this already, which may well have happened. On Tapatalk, I look at the "New Posts" option just to see what has recently been posted. I almost always skip most topics, including politics, believe it or not. As Rocker notes, I could set my page so I see only threads I've participated in or subscribed to. Are you saying that the format is confusing so that new users do not take that approach and get turned off by an apparent imbalance in topics?

I visit another VBulletin based forum for a owners of a model of a motorcycle that I have. They have 22 different forum categories, about half of which are not specific to this specific motorcycle, and about 1/4 of which have nothing to do with motorcycling at all. I usually skip over about 3/4 of the threads in the New Post page while I pick and choose the threads I am interested in. I enjoy this ala cart type viewing, and I guess it is why I am not really understanding jrj's concerns. Boards like Utefans.net and Cougarboard that give you no option to pick and chose without endless scrolling drive me nuts.

Maybe if we want to have the focus be on sports talk, we see if there is a way on the New Post page to have threads from the sports categories float to the top? I'm just spit-balling here.

[jrj84105]

Serious question: Please forgive me if I've missed this already, which may well have happened. On Tapatalk, I look at the "New Posts" option just to see what has recently been posted. I almost always skip most topics, including politics, believe it or not. As Rocker notes, I could set my page so I see only threads I've participated in or subscribed to. Are you saying that the format is confusing so that new users do not take that approach and get turned off by an apparent imbalance in topics?

First, I don't think the majority of visitors interface through tapatalk, at least not initially. I don't use it personally as if at all possible I'd like to access a site through a browser rather than an app.

Second, the average new viewer probably doesn't selectively scroll through a bunch of titles and read some threads and ignore others. They're going to Browse the top 3-4 threads, form an opinion, then leave or stay. On this site, those 4 threads are likely to be one religious, one political, one 2016 football thread that is 15 pages long starting with preseason, and one basketball thread that is similarly long and hard to jump into midstream. It's very inaccessible from a new user standpoint.

This inaccessibility seems not to be seen as problematic by the current user group, but the current user group is a selection of all the visitors who came and weren't turned off and is not representative of the potential user base.

[sancho]

First, I don't think the majority of visitors interface through tapatalk, at least not initially. I don't use it personally as if at all possible I'd like to access a site through a browser rather than an app.

Second, the average new viewer probably doesn't selectively scroll through a bunch of titles and read some threads and ignore others. They're going to Browse the top 3-4 threads, form an opinion, then leave or stay. On this site, those 4 threads are likely to be one religious, one political, one 2016 football thread that is 15 pages long starting with preseason, and one basketball thread that is similarly long and hard to jump into midstream. It's very inaccessible from a new user standpoint.

This inaccessibility seems not to be seen as problematic by the current user group, but the current user group is a selection of all the visitors who came and weren't turned off and is not representative of the potential user base.

I think this is true. The board has been heavy on politics lately (not so much religion). If we want new posters, showing the sports posts first makes sense.

Also, there is a list of questions to answer for new users introducing themselves. The list is largely ignored, but the religion question could/should be removed from that list.

What's funny is that utefans always had as much politics/religion talk as we have here. The layout makes it feel like the opposite is true, especially to visitors.

[jrj84105]

I'm all for being welcoming. Maybe we do put the politics and church talk behind the registration wall, but I think the only result will be making this board look inactive. No pun intended.

I think this change is sort of long overdue. The part about the only result would be "making the board look inactive" is what answers the initial question of does there need to be a change.

The proboards.com platform really doesn't seem all that different from vbulletin and no offense but the uofuboard.com design looks dated to me already. Maybe that is my aversion to mid 2000 icons.

That's what happens when the styling is left up to someone who doesn't even know what CSS stands for.

[Rocker Ute]

I think this change is sort of long overdue. The part about the only result would be "making the board look inactive" is what answers the initial question of does there need to be a change.


That's what happens when the styling is left up to someone who doesn't even know what CSS stands for.

So why are you doing it then? I'm really not trying to be a jerk, I guess i'm just not getting it. I've seen you pitching the site around a few places so I'm just curious.

And maybe I should explain my POV. I've spent enough time around message boards to realize that the quickest way to kill something is to try to control what is being communicated and what should be communicated about on a board. Almost universally the boards that do well and have large memberships are allowed to be pretty organic while maintaining a level of respect. For good or bad, non-sports subjects are the glue of a site in a lot of ways and what keep people sticking around and making it habitual. Trying to suppress that will likely just kill the board.

Put aside for a minute the technical and design issues of UF.N and just consider the community. Long before any of those issues UF.N has long since become a place I don't feel welcome because many of the people there have drastically different views and interests than I do. I went from posting multiple times a day to once a week and then eventually not at all. I could spend time trying to correct that (and fail) or I can find a community that works for me. For others the content and community of UF.N have never been better and so that is great. Let UF.N be what it is.

Conversely this community came from the cougarute forum and I was (am) a bit of an outsider here. I'm not as smart or good looking as most of the people here, but I still enjoy it for what it is.

My 2 cents.

[jrj84105]

The community is great here. The basketball discussion is very good compared to other Ute sites. ALL forum layouts are intrinsically less accessible than the threaded format of Utefans and Utehub but have the advantage of fostering more depth of discussion and are less prone to the sort of memetic drive-by posting that ultimately dominates most threaded boards. The more cerebral nature of this board is as much a function of it being a forum as it is of the individual users IMO. The layout influences how people interact.

Because a forum is intrinsically less accessible due to partitioning and a requirement to click a few times before viewing anything, I think the design has to try and compensate by promoting greater accessibility. That's why I sort of complained about definitive THE whatever threads that ran interminably. There's also no way a Utes board is going to succeed or have any breadth of users unless it handles religion and politics somewhat separately from sports.

I bring all this up becaus I think Utefans is on it's last legs. If the attitude here is that we don't really want any of those posters, and we're certainly not willing to change to facilitate new users, then that's certainly cool. If the attitude is that additional users are wanted, then it's time to get moving on making some significant changes, IMO.

[sancho]

And maybe I should explain my POV. I've spent enough time around message boards to realize that the quickest way to kill something is to try to control what is being communicated and what should be communicated about on a board. Almost universally the boards that do well and have large memberships are allowed to be pretty organic while maintaining a level of respect. For good or bad, non-sports subjects are the glue of a site in a lot of ways and what keep people sticking around and making it habitual. Trying to suppress that will likely just kill the board.

I don't think he's really suggesting that anything be suppressed. Just make it so that when someone hits "new posts," it shows the sports posts in a bunch on top and the other posts in a bunch underneath (if I understand correctly). If possible, I don't think it's a drastic change.

I guess we could try to be better about parsing threads so that a new user doesn't have to try and join an ongoing, 3 year conversation. I, of course, still like the idea of killing everything over a year old just for routine street sweeping.

[jrj84105]

So why are you doing it then? I'm really not trying to be a jerk, I guess i'm just not getting it. I've seen you pitching the site around a few places so I'm just curious.

And maybe I should explain my POV. I've spent enough time around message boards to realize that the quickest way to kill something is to try to control what is being communicated and what should be communicated about on a board. Almost universally the boards that do well and have large memberships are allowed to be pretty organic while maintaining a level of respect. For good or bad, non-sports subjects are the glue of a site in a lot of ways and what keep people sticking around and making it habitual. Trying to suppress that will likely just kill the board.

Put aside for a minute the technical and design issues of UF.N and just consider the community. Long before any of those issues UF.N has long since become a place I don't feel welcome because many of the people there have drastically different views and interests than I do. I went from posting multiple times a day to once a week and then eventually not at all. I could spend time trying to correct that (and fail) or I can find a community that works for me. For others the content and community of UF.N have never been better and so that is great. Let UF.N be what it is.

Conversely this community came from the cougarute forum and I was (am) a bit of an outsider here. I'm not as smart or good looking as most of the people here, but I still enjoy it for what it is.

My 2 cents.

First off, I love futureman. "Did you see what he was wearing" was probably my favorite line of that movie.

You're not being a jerk at all. And "why" is a great question. I spend too much time on boards. I look at boards of other schools and conferences, and for the most part the boards are totally amateur compared to what you find for different interest groups, especially nerdy topics where 90% of the users are programmers. But those poorly designed sports boards WAAAAAY outperform their design and are heavily trafficked.

Utah boards, including this one, are better than the average college sports board but are WAAAAY less trafficked. Why? Because, as you said, non-sports subjects are an essential glue for holding boards together, especially in maintaining off-season traffic. Ute fans, more than any other fanbase IMO, are polarized and passionate about religion, politics, and sports and the unique convergence of those topics in this state. Essentially, our glue is bad.

So I watch as new sites spring up (Utahby5 and later Utehub) and they look good, but then I sort of question "what are you doing about the glue issue?" and the answer is "Just click what you like; nobody's forcing those topics on you". Although I agree that an unsupervised spontaneous site is better 99% of the time, I think it has failed 100% of the time for Ute-related boards.

So I sort of thought maybe it's just technically really hard to segregate content, and like most of my IT requests it's poorly worded and impossible. So I tried to see what it entailed so I could better explain what I wanted. That snowballed into just building a site as a thought exercise in segregating content. It works for Cougarboard, and they (unfortunately) are probably a better model for what might work for Ute fans than other fan bases, so why not try it?

So for why? Because persistent unaddressed bitching led to a thought exercise that turned into a forum. It was an accident. And after investing a certain amount of time in an accident, it turns out that it's not so bad. Ultimately, I want a Utah web presence that actually lives up to our enthusiastic fanbase. I don't think that's possible until somebody designs with the primary attempt of fixing the glue issue. I'd rather a really good web developer do that while I sit back and enjoy, but the glue doesn't seem to be seen as the top priority for others who have tried.

So because I see a window for opportunity for uniting the fanbase when Utefans collapses, I'm sort of imploring somebody (Utahby5) to fix their glue and be prepared to step into that void when it opens.

[sancho]

It works for Cougarboard, and they (unfortunately) are probably a better model for what might work for Ute fans than other fan bases, so why not try it?

It's been years since I've been to CB, but they don't have the glue problem you are describing, right? I imagine that place as more of an echo chamber than a cornucopia of ideas/opinions.

Again, if it's an easy change for U-Ute, I see no reason why we can't group "new posts" into sports and other categories.

[U-Ute]

It's been years since I've been to CB, but they don't have the glue problem you are describing, right? I imagine that place as more of an echo chamber than a cornucopia of ideas/opinions.

Again, if it's an easy change for U-Ute, I see no reason why we can't group "new posts" into sports and other categories.

It doesn't appear to be that easy. I can hard code a filter to remove forums, but I'd rather have that be user configurable because what one person may want filtered out, another person will want to see.

[U-Ute]

First off, I love futureman. "Did you see what he was wearing" was probably my favorite line of that movie.

You're not being a jerk at all. And "why" is a great question. I spend too much time on boards. I look at boards of other schools and conferences, and for the most part the boards are totally amateur compared to what you find for different interest groups, especially nerdy topics where 90% of the users are programmers. But those poorly designed sports boards WAAAAAY outperform their design and are heavily trafficked.

Utah boards, including this one, are better than the average college sports board but are WAAAAY less trafficked. Why? Because, as you said, non-sports subjects are an essential glue for holding boards together, especially in maintaining off-season traffic. Ute fans, more than any other fanbase IMO, are polarized and passionate about religion, politics, and sports and the unique convergence of those topics in this state. Essentially, our glue is bad.

So I watch as new sites spring up (Utahby5 and later Utehub) and they look good, but then I sort of question "what are you doing about the glue issue?" and the answer is "Just click what you like; nobody's forcing those topics on you". Although I agree that an unsupervised spontaneous site is better 99% of the time, I think it has failed 100% of the time for Ute-related boards.

So I sort of thought maybe it's just technically really hard to segregate content, and like most of my IT requests it's poorly worded and impossible. So I tried to see what it entailed so I could better explain what I wanted. That snowballed into just building a site as a thought exercise in segregating content. It works for Cougarboard, and they (unfortunately) are probably a better model for what might work for Ute fans than other fan bases, so why not try it?

So for why? Because persistent unaddressed bitching led to a thought exercise that turned into a forum. It was an accident. And after investing a certain amount of time in an accident, it turns out that it's not so bad. Ultimately, I want a Utah web presence that actually lives up to our enthusiastic fanbase. I don't think that's possible until somebody designs with the primary attempt of fixing the glue issue. I'd rather a really good web developer do that while I sit back and enjoy, but the glue doesn't seem to be seen as the top priority for others who have tried.

So because I see a window for opportunity for uniting the fanbase when Utefans collapses, I'm sort of imploring somebody (Utahby5) to fix their glue and be prepared to step into that void when it opens.

I'm a little confused.

Your initial posts were saying that there's too many non-sports related posts, and now you're saying their necessary to keep the board interesting. Perhaps what you really want is a good balance?

I'm wondering if the problem is the number of sports related forums vs non-sports related forums. We have 5 sports forums, of which only 2 are active (>100 threads) and 9 non-sports forums, of which 4 are active (>100 threads). But the interesting thing is that the number of threads that are sports related (880) is basically the same as all of the non sports threads (828).

So maybe the fact that those non-sports related threads are spread out across multiple forums gives the appearance that there are many more non-sports related posts when there isn't.

[jrj84105]

I'm a big believer in the concept of overchoice, and think that the limited browsing options for Utefans was a big part of its success. That's why I think suppressing the religiopolitical stuff for all users rather than presenting another choice is preferable. That is unless the site browsing options are otherwise markedly reduced to leave it as one of very few choices.

Having too many approximately equally good options is mentally draining because each option must be weighed against alternatives to select the best one. The satisfaction of choices by number of options available can be described by an inverted “U” model.

Although larger choice sets can be initially appealing, smaller choice sets lead to increased satisfaction and reduced regret. Another component of overchoice is the perception of time. Extensive choice sets can seem even more difficult with a limited time constraint.

[sancho]

So maybe the fact that those non-sports related threads are spread out across multiple forums gives the appearance that there are many more non-sports related posts when there isn't.

Our active sports threads are often short lived (the WSU/UW road trip thread will last one week, and then we will move on to the Ducks). The only sports thread that is built to last forever (like some of the politics/religion threads) is the BYU hate thread. All the rest of them have expiration dates. So...put expiration dates on all the threads? The "2017 believer thread," for example. Spitballing here.

[U-Ute]

Our active sports threads are often short lived (the WSU/UW road trip thread will last one week, and then we will move on to the Ducks). The only sports thread that is built to last forever (like some of the politics/religion threads) is the BYU hate thread. All the rest of them have expiration dates. So...put expiration dates on all the threads? The "2017 believer thread," for example. Spitballing here.

Your observation does bear some truth.

There are 55,008 sports related posts and 22,187 non-sports related posts, but the way it is presented gives the opposite impression.

[jrj84105]

I'm a little confused.

Your initial posts were saying that there's too many non-sports related posts, and now you're saying their necessary to keep the board interesting. Perhaps what you really want is a good balance?

I'm wondering if the problem is the number of sports related forums vs non-sports related forums. We have 5 sports forums, of which only 2 are active (>100 threads) and 9 non-sports forums, of which 4 are active (>100 threads). But the interesting thing is that the number of threads that are sports related (880) is basically the same as all of the non sports threads (828).

So maybe the fact that those non-sports related threads are spread out across multiple forums gives the appearance that there are many more non-sports related posts when there isn't.

Now you've really hit the central issue: Balance is in the eye of the beholder. Broad and potentially offensive stereotypes to follow.

For an active LDS user for whom religion plays a large role in daily life, a 50/50 split might seem somewhat balanced. For a non-religious person or even a person of another faith where religion is less prominent in daily life, that 50/50 mix could be seen as very unbalanced. Although the board content is whatever people post, and there'a nothing layout wise that you can or should do about that, how that content appears to the user is a product of the design. Broadly, I think that design could present:
1) an unbiased representation of content- the current model here.
2) a user selected bias (actively check/uncheck your categories-the Cougarboard model).
3) a design determined bias (the design specifies the checked unchecked).

I don't think option one works for this fanbase. I think option two is the best IF users have a positive first impression and commit to the site before customizing. As above, I think first impression is problematic here. I think 3 might work as long as it's easy enough to backend into the unchecked content once you're familiar with the site. That's what ai'm trying as I haven't seen that approach on a Ute site before.
PS: if you look at the number of logged-in users viewing the site versus the number of guests checking in, it's clear that most people are going to see the design specified layout rather than a user-defined selection. That's another reason why I favor option 3.

With that, I better take a discussion break and work on some other stuff.

[Rocker Ute]

Now you've really hit the central issue: Balance is in the eye of the beholder. Broad and potentially offensive stereotypes to follow.

For an active LDS user for whom religion plays a large role in daily life, a 50/50 split might seem somewhat balanced. For a non-religious person or even a person of another faith where religion is less prominent in daily life, that 50/50 mix could be seen as very unbalanced. Although the board content is whatever people post, and there'a nothing layout wise that you can or should do about that, how that content appears to the user is a product of the design. Broadly, I think that design could present:
1) an unbiased representation of content- the current model here.
2) a user selected bias (actively check/uncheck your categories-the Cougarboard model).
3) a design determined bias (the design specifies the checked unchecked).

I don't think option one works for this fanbase. I think option two is the best IF users have a positive first impression and commit to the site before customizing. As above, I think first impression is problematic here. I think 3 might work as long as it's easy enough to backend into the unchecked content once you're familiar with the site. That's what ai'm trying as I haven't seen that approach on a Ute site before.
PS: if you look at the number of logged-in users viewing the site versus the number of guests checking in, it's clear that most people are going to see the design specified layout rather than a user-defined selection. That's another reason why I favor option 3.

With that, I better take a discussion break and work on some other stuff.

Non sports related posts ≠ religious posts though. But I get it. You want the sports stuff here, you don't want to hear LA Ute harass me about filling out proper paperwork for scout activities.

I think really the best way to address this issue, if it really is an issue, is simply to have the ability to ignore a topic. There appears to be a way to do this. This was 15 seconds of searching, but it is a plug-in/hack to do that in vbulletin. http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=323495

The other is if we are trying to attract new users then move the politics and religious stuff behind registration (I think you can already do that with no modification to the system).

I'd also suggest maybe a CSS freshening up here a bit. U-Ute, you know I am willing to help with that if you'd like.

As a sign of my goodwill, attached is a new header image that isn't so pixelated for your consideration.

utah-by-5.jpg

[jrj84105]

Non sports related posts ≠ religious posts though. But I get it. You want the sports stuff here, you don't want to hear LA Ute harass me about filling out proper paperwork for scout activities.
utah-by-5.jpg

Yes- there are plenty of benign off topic things to discuss. I like the religion and politics stuff, but the overwhelming response from people who didn't join or stick around here was that it took too large of a stage. I'm glad to see some people seriously considering these changes. I also love your header.

[U-Ute]

Non sports related posts ≠ religious posts though. But I get it. You want the sports stuff here, you don't want to hear LA Ute harass me about filling out proper paperwork for scout activities.

I think really the best way to address this issue, if it really is an issue, is simply to have the ability to ignore a topic. There appears to be a way to do this. This was 15 seconds of searching, but it is a plug-in/hack to do that in vbulletin. http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=323495

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it works for the Activity Thread. It allows you to specify which forums to ignore elsewhere on the board though.

The other is if we are trying to attract new users then move the politics and religious stuff behind registration (I think you can already do that with no modification to the system).

I'd also suggest maybe a CSS freshening up here a bit. U-Ute, you know I am willing to help with that if you'd like.

As a sign of my goodwill, attached is a new header image that isn't so pixelated for your consideration.

utah-by-5.jpg

I like that look.

[Rocker Ute]

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it works for the Activity Thread. It allows you to specify which forums to ignore elsewhere on the board though.



I like that look.

Bummer on the activity thread. Meanwhile I got a hankerin' for some tinkerin' and tweaked the CSS a bit to freshen up the design. I'm happy to do this to the site if people like it:

ub5-mockup.jpg


A little lighter and cleaner look. I've always been a minimalist when it comes to design though.

[jrj84105]

I think it would be a good idea to roll out the redesign and the new site features simultaneously rather than piecemeal. Again, presuming this site would like to expand its user base, I think the best approach would be a global relaunch/rebranding.

[LA Ute]

Bummer on the activity thread. Meanwhile I got a hankerin' for some tinkerin' and tweaked the CSS a bit to freshen up the design. I'm happy to do this to the site if people like it:

ub5-mockup.jpg


A little lighter and cleaner look. I've always been a minimalist when it comes to design though.

I like this!

[LA Ute]

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it works for the Activity Thread. It allows you to specify which forums to ignore elsewhere on the board though.

I like the idea of making the board look more balanced and not unintentionally off-putting to many potential members. If we can add the plug-in you've found, why not?

I wonder if we can add something prominent like "How to Use This Board" so people who aren't familiar with vBulletin will not give up quickly.

Also, if any of us know people who we want to recruit from other boards, let's invite them and respond to any concerns they express. That's the best way to grow with quality posters.

[jrj84105]

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it works for the Activity Thread. It allows you to specify which forums to ignore elsewhere on the board though.

I went with the Proboards because that was the one option where I could specifically get this function to work. I'm too ignorant to know if or how it can be done on vBulletin, but I think it's a critical piece to putting the the religion/politics in the background. Also, I really think the religion/politics needs to require users to opt IN rather than opt OUT. Otherwise visitors and lurkers who don't log in are going to be fully aware of that content.

[jrj84105]

Any more thought about broadening the reach now that Utefans seems to really be dying?

[LA Ute]

Any more thought about broadening the reach now that Utefans seems to really be dying?

I think we should do what we can. Some ideas seemed to have consensus support but probably were set aside. Can we revive them?