i just generally have the thought that Lounge and Site Feedback should share a common top level, not because of what they are, but because of what they are not. then they would be divided below that. maybe we can even have 2 lounges, one clearly “no politics or religion”. one less top level choice could help new participant even more. just thinking about this before it becomes my opinion (to be shared if desired).
Who sets the tags? I suppose it is the original poster. While using UF, I always tried to set tags, but sometimes I overlooked setting tags.
Usually it’s the original poster. But if a mod sees a tag that doesn’t make sense, they may change it, just as they may move a post to a more suitable area if it’s needed.
1 Like
Categories are not opaque silos. A person on, say, the Security Team sees (and can post to) topics from Foundations and Release and Community and all the others. That’s the default setting. It takes an effort to find the control and hide them.
So the “provision” would be the current default settings.
We considered it. If the need appears for additional or changed structure, it can be done rapidly. Since changes can be made rapidly, the current consensus among moderators is to wait for needs to appear instead of trying to forecast.
As I look at the Lounge today, it has only four topics with any activity in the past week. Hardly a noisy scene that needs to be split up anytime soon.
2 Likes
Just feedback from a person that really didn’t want to do the transition etc, etc.
Usually the detractors wind up being your strongest supporters.
Thus far those of you that have been decluttering and revamping efforts has been absolutely great.
It is becoming easier for a person such as myself to navigate and use this media.
So Thank you for leaning forward in the saddle so to speak. I applaud your efforts .
Sorry if this may seem distracting I just felt the need to input my two cents in and thank the team for their hard work on this.
It is getting better. Again Thank You
7 Likes
Thank you, @sgt-mike! The feedback from Forums folks has been incredibly helpful and we’re grateful for the support. We’ll continue to make improvements and hopefully turn the Discourse into a lively and exciting place worthy of our community.
4 Likes
@aaronprisk I have no doubt of that being the case.
Another blow-in from Ubuntu Forums here.
Maybe it would be helpful to analyse the search facility for results on what the majority of users actually come to the website for in the first place, and work backwards from there.
Maybe most visitors come here for information or help, others to see what’s happening in Ubuntu land or whatever. Just my thoughts. Tony.
3 Likes
It’s a good thought,
and it inspired me to pull the top 9 search terms for the past month.
| Term | Searches | CTR |
|---|---|---|
| wallpaper | 35 | 20% |
| ask ubuntu is flooded with failed 22 04 24 04 upgrade issues | 26 | 0% |
| zfs | 14 | 35.8% |
| ubuntu core | 13 | 23.1% |
| ubuntu 22 04 pxe uefi netboot desktop installation | 11 | 0% |
| flutter | 10 | 10% |
| 22.04 | 9 | 0% |
| kernel 6.12 for 24.04 | 9 | 0% |
| mate category:mir order:latest | 9 | 0% |
CTR = click through rate
I see a lot of interest in ZFS and in Ubuntu Core. And we have had a couple questions about those subjects.
Beyond that, don’t see a pattern to be gleaned right now that might help navigation.
Perhaps the dataset it too small. Not enough new users searching yet.
2 Likes
Ian - I seem to remember from my web-hosting days it is possible to collect the data from the original website from which a visitor came, so it’s possible to see if they came to ubuntu discourse via a search engine, or via some other route.
That may well prove more enlightening than an internal search on the website itself.
Thinking about it, I’m sure it’s possible as otherwise how would feeder websites such as compare etc. be able to access the click-through data to gain revenue?