^ That page gives a pretty good, succinct summary of what's needed before you give a page a hat. With a rename, it could be a good page to link to near the hat interface.
Gentleman Troper!
I think we discussed this months ago. The main cause of lack of YKTTW throughput appears to be its confusing interface. So yes, moving to a forum layout (for which we already have the code, anyway) would be a substantial improvement. After all, there is a reason why tons of websites use forum layouts, and as far as I know nobody at all except for us uses this particular layout.
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!
There is no data to support that position at all.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Lost in Space
The basic reply-and-edit functionality of YKTTW is fine, or at least it is to me. The confusing part for some people seems to be the launching process.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
In uffish thought
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Can I add a half-dozen more pleases to that? 
I am not particularly supportive of adding a holler button on YKTTW. There aren't that many moderator functions on YKTTW to begin with (and some of these are moderator only only as a temporary solution), and for most other purposes Ask The Tropers offers much better service.
That said, yes, YKTTW can use some upgrading. Having some "liposuction" applied to the YKTTW list (—>[1]
) and several other changes (such as make the YKTTW history display the actual editors, rather than just the sponsor)
Dragon Writer
^ And a diff-style edit history, rather than showing the complete draft code at each and every edit made to it.
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.
And didn't I start another thread about large-scale changes to YKTTW?
See the Ask The Tropers sentence in that post.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanBut going to another forum/part of the wiki to file a report is a very roundabout and annoying process. Not to mention not everyone knows about ATT and may not be sure whether it's the right place.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
That is true, but hollers has its own problems - namely, that it gets underuse concerns and Black Box ones. And are you really sure that people will use hollers more than ATT?
A more interesting question - what would you need a moderator for, in YKTTW.
edited 7th Jan '13 11:41:46 PM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
In uffish thought
Currently, removing draft tags, e.g. when there are duplicates or when one is obsolete. I just ignore them if something is going well, as posting in ATT or hollering for every draft's tags isn't worth it.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
As was discussed somewhere else, the draft tagging issue is more of an intermediary solution. I think that it could be fixed by making their removal log in but-not-the-sponsor specific.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The reason tag removal became mod only is because sponsors were removing tags like "Motion to Discard" and "Needs Better Name" even when they were in violation of site rules.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
In honor of my 50lb pup
Something I've seen on Kongregate is that people continually vote on tags and the top 3 are the ones that end up displayed with the game. There are also user-made tags, but only a few are really popular.
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!
That has no use here. YKTT Ws may need all the tags. The tags label what still needs to be fixed. They're repair tools. Not a popularity measure. Kongregate uses their tags for something entirely different than we do.
edited 8th Jan '13 6:23:25 AM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
In honor of my 50lb pup
Wouldn't it help with figuring out what the major problems are for any particular YKTTW? Besides, you can see how many votes each and every tag has for every game. You just have to click the link to see that.
If 10 people "vote" for a "Needs a better name" while 30 "vote" for "motion to discard" it would show that the YKTTW ether needs a TON of work or that it should just be discarded.
On the other side, if 30 "vote" for "Needs a better description" while 10 "vote" for "needs a better name" I would assume that people think the name is OK while the description needs work.
Hats could still be used as an "overall status" indicator, but this would help focus the conversations.
Note that Kongregate does not limit you to "voting" for one tag per game. You can "vote" once for each tag or abstain from voting at all. Here that would mean you could "vote" for every tag you think is applicable.
Also, we would not have to worry about removing tags. As issues are fixed, we could allow people to remove their "vote" and other issues (or "ready for launch") would get more "votes".
(FYI: I have no idea how such a thing would be implemented/programmed and am perfectly willing to drop the subject if Eddie says "no")
edited 8th Jan '13 9:23:15 AM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!
Tags aren't votes.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
In uffish thought
Hm, interesting idea. Thing is, I'm worried that might discourage people using the comments to address issues, where more detailed feedback can be provided. People would also likely vote for something and, when it's resolve, simply not have ever returned to the draft meaning their vote is never removed.
Getting consensus that an article needs a better description, a better name, or more examples isn't a problem in YKTTW at all. The issue is people actually turning that post of "needs a better name" into a name suggestion, "needs a better description" into constructive feedback or a write-up, "more examples" into actual media examples, and so on. To me, it looks like a new tool to code for something that won't really help.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
I do not like votes there, unless you are forced to explain them.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
In honor of my 50lb pup
I know. That is why I kept putting the word "vote" in quotation marks even though that is the term Kongregate uses.
I mainly thought about it/brought it up as a way to make tags more relevant. As they are now, they don't mean a whole lot because you can't remove or compare them. If you are looking to just spend a few min in YKTTW and want to help people come up with witty names, you can search for things with that tag but you have to really look at each one to see if it has already been addressed.
The same (but even more so) if you are going through and discarding old ones.
The problem there is people using a nonsense message just to "vote". Though I would not have a problem if an optional msg box popped up. Or at least a reminder that comments are worth more than "votes".
edited 8th Jan '13 10:11:05 AM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!
Tags can be removed by moderators. Just PM them with the YKTTW that needs a tag removed.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Yeah, I suspect it's one of the things that deliberately not having a tag is the point. There is still the text tag Needs Launching Votes....
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.