Limit Groups Visibility

I think it would be great to have the option to [b]only[/b] see posts of the topics/"forums" I'm "subscribed" to. I get a lot of content on my "home" feed that is irrelevant to me. Sometimes even downright unpleasant, disturbing or disgusting (and this is considering that I have left the "fetish" content setting unchecked. I don't even know what I would get if I turn that on).

I'm even surprised that that it's not a default behavior. Being fully honest I don't get the purpose of "forums" or categories or topics or whatever they are called (***) , if selecting the ones you like still give you every other group on your feed; you are still getting bombarded with topics you have zero interest on, and muting groups one by one is cumbersome.

Also; it would be great to have the ability to create groups that by default don't get shown to people who have not opted-in (assuming that the previous behavior is not the default one). This would actually be helpful with the "Role Playing" community, as well as groups that discuss sensitive or polarizing topics that the rest of the users (except those who actively choose to see them) would rather not see on their home feed.

(***): Partially related; The words "forum" and "group" seem to be used interchangeably in the UI, even using the same icon, so that already causes UX confusion on its own.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Nuno · Admin

Hello,
Thank you for your feedback.

[quote]I think it would be great to have the option to only see posts of the topics/"forums" I'm "subscribed" to.[/quote]

I see you created a secondary feed, and you adjusted the "Groups you Follow" to the "More" side.
Has this helped?

I suggest you try this combination:

[quote]I'm even surprised that that it's not a default behavior.[/quote]

At the same time you say this, we have several users that complain to us in a weekly basis, asking why doesn't the home feed show every single post, from every user and group, sorted by time 🙂

[quote]Sometimes even downright unpleasant, disturbing or disgusting (and this is considering that I have left the "fetish" content setting unchecked. I don't even know what I would get if I turn that on).[/quote]

I'm sorry if this is happening.

Please make sure you always use the Report Abuse button when you find offensive posts/messages/users, so that the incident is logged in our system. A moderator will review and an appropriate action will be taken. Having the incidents logged directly in our system not only helps us identify the users that are recurrently offending our members, but appropriate actions might be taken automatically by our system in many cases.

[quote]The words "forum" and "group" seem to be used interchangeably in the UI[/quote]

On SimilarWorlds, we use this structure:

[u]Category[/u] » [u]Topic[/u] » [u]Forum[/u] » [u]Group[/u]

Example, for where this Post is:

[u]People & Family[/u] » [u]Social Websites & Apps[/u] » [u]SimilarWorlds Suggestions[/u] » [u]SW UI / UX Suggestions[/u]

I hope this makes sense!

[quote]it would be great to have the ability to create groups that by default don't get shown to people who have not opted-in (assuming that the previous behavior is not the default one). This would actually be helpful with the "Role Playing" community[/quote]

I understand, and appreciate the suggestion.

We have something like this planned for the future (Private Groups/Spaces), but we don't yet have an estimated time when this will be ready.

Kind regards.

BigBoss · M

@Nuno Thanks for the quick reply. I understand the hierarchy now that you've explained, but in the UI is neither clear, nor consistent, nor useful. In the user profile for example I can pick "Forums to follow" (Which seems like a very arbitrary granularity level: Why not topics? or categories? Or groups? ). Then I can also pick interests (which I assume affects at a topic or category level). And on top of that the "rating" level (adult, fetish, etc). This is needlessly complicated in my opinion.

Also, from a UI standpoint, the "3 connected dots" is used in most places to indicate forums, but in places like the "Create Group" button and the "Associated Groups" link, the same icon is used, so I would assume it also means groups? That certainly doesn't help to clarify the whole system.

Regarding your custom feed suggestion, those settings did not help. A quick inspection and I'm still seeing posts about relationships (which is not a topic I follow), religion (same), health (don't follow either), etc. I used to get a lot of politics on the feed until I started silencing the topic and that was already a bother.

While it's great that there's people who love to see variety beyond their interests in their feed, at that point the whole concept of picking topics, forums or groups become meaningless. Why having that whole hierarchy of content labeling, if in the end it doesn't serve as a proper filter to the content I get served?

With that in mind, I insist with my suggestion. Doesn't need to be the default, especially if you get people who want to see a broader selection of topics, but considering the whole system of categories and sub-categories you have, it doesn't make sense to lack the ability to only see content tailored to the selections made.

Finally, Private groups sounds like a good idea, so already looking forward to that.