McGeeisme · 61-69, M
Are we done with the annoying consolidations? I hope.
OogieBoogie · F
How do you know that
Ive never seen one user mention this .
And if posts were consecutive in time posted , it wouldn't need be an issue.
If we respond to a post , we usually get notified of replies to it , and its easy to find in our notifications .
If we dont respond to a post , we are usually not interested in it .
Its why we want to see more of the feed...like we used to .
Its the stagnacy of it that is the recent problem.
What we need to know is how to get round the constrictions of the new feed algorythm.
Do we join more groups?
Register more interests in our profile settings?
What can we do to get the breadth of our old feed back ?
I really do hope you are working on improving the feed, I know we'd all appreciate it.
Thanks.
Most users seem to not prefer having the feed "Shuffle" immediately between near successive visits, as this can be confusing and overwhelming to many.
?Ive never seen one user mention this .
And if posts were consecutive in time posted , it wouldn't need be an issue.
If we respond to a post , we usually get notified of replies to it , and its easy to find in our notifications .
If we dont respond to a post , we are usually not interested in it .
Its why we want to see more of the feed...like we used to .
Its the stagnacy of it that is the recent problem.
What we need to know is how to get round the constrictions of the new feed algorythm.
Do we join more groups?
Register more interests in our profile settings?
What can we do to get the breadth of our old feed back ?
I really do hope you are working on improving the feed, I know we'd all appreciate it.
Thanks.
View 4 more replies »
OogieBoogie · F
@Andrew i understand the new feed algoryrhm is an attempt to reduce conflict between users .
And i get its hard to please everybody.
Does the new algorythm not allow a choice between a filtered feed, and an unfiltered feed in the way it works ?
I get many appreciate being able to personalise their feed. Its just that many also appreciate not having a flitered feed.
Its a shame we cant have both.
I do have a question though:
What is meant by 'relevant'?
How is that determined?
And i get its hard to please everybody.
Does the new algorythm not allow a choice between a filtered feed, and an unfiltered feed in the way it works ?
I get many appreciate being able to personalise their feed. Its just that many also appreciate not having a flitered feed.
Its a shame we cant have both.
I do have a question though:
What is meant by 'relevant'?
How is that determined?
Starcrossed · 41-45, F
Some users prefer to have their content only seen by those who are "Relevant" (or in the same group).
Are there user polls I've never seen? Some users, many very vocal these days, don't care who their content is displayed to, but rather do care what is [not] being displayed to themselves.Why are we catering to 'some' non vocal users.
OogieBoogie · F
@Andrew ummm, ive thought about what you said, and i have a worry .
Take the religious context you mentioned...
....if groups such as "i dislike religion" are in the same main category as "Christianity" (and others) , doesnt this then cause conflict ?
If relevence is related to groups in some way , my worry is ....it could feasibly connect opposites, rather than disconnect them.
Maybe i understand it wrong .
Take the religious context you mentioned...
....if groups such as "i dislike religion" are in the same main category as "Christianity" (and others) , doesnt this then cause conflict ?
If relevence is related to groups in some way , my worry is ....it could feasibly connect opposites, rather than disconnect them.
Maybe i understand it wrong .
Andromedanian · 26-30, M
CountScrofula · 41-45, M
therighttothink50 · 56-60, M
AmericanBroad · 31-35, F
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
PiecingBabyFaceTogether · 31-35, M
BeefySenpie · M
iamonfire696 · 41-45, F
CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M
Tminus6453 · M
Lilnonames · F
SW-User
Do you make fun of your users at meetings?