Splitting Coffee Corner?

[rabanito]

How about splitting the column in two, "Coffee Corner Photography" and "Coffee Corner Non-Photography"
This was done with the Showcases (albeit both related to photography) Landscape and Street successfully AFAIK

In this way the non-interested-public would be spared from some clicking forward, reading something unrelated and getting out clicking  backwards, which can be enormously tiring and boring in the long run

[Rob C]

How about splitting the column in two, "Coffee Corner Photography" and "Coffee Corner Non-Photography"
This was done with the Showcases (albeit both related to photography) Landscape and Street successfully AFAIK

In this way the non-interested-public would be spared from some clicking forward, reading something unrelated and getting out clicking  backwards, which can be enormously tiring and boring in the long run

Or, you could get another Alexa to read it to you, the bowdlerized version of LuLa, that is.

[jeremyrh]

How about splitting the column in two, "Coffee Corner Photography" and "Coffee Corner Non-Photography"
This was done with the Showcases (albeit both related to photography) Landscape and Street successfully AFAIK

In this way the non-interested-public would be spared from some clicking forward, reading something unrelated and getting out clicking  backwards, which can be enormously tiring and boring in the long run

Another benefit of learning to read - using the topic titles to avoid all that strenuous button clicking.

[amolitor]

It's cute to say "well just don't read it" but that is to completely ignore human nature.

[Rob C]

It's cute to say "well just don't read it" but that is to completely ignore human nature.

So that means that LuLa needs to compensate for the lack of self-control exhibited by folks without enough of it?

That sounds suspiciously like the "nanny state" so derided by some who object to regulations such as not smoking in restaurants, or even to the wearing of seat belts.

:-)

[faberryman]

So that means that LuLa needs to compensate for the lack of self-control exhibited by folks without enough of it?

That sounds suspiciously like the "nanny state" so derided by some who object to regulations such as not smoking in restaurants, or even to the wearing of seat belts.

:-)

Are you suggesting that there only be one forum? Talk about a nanny state: do we really need three dozen subforums? Why not like GMail with one folder and a search function? I just click on "Show unread posts since last visit" and read what interests me. Isn't that what everyone does? Surely no one accesses threads from the forums page where you can't even read the titles of the threads.

[Rob C]

Are you suggesting that there only be one forum? Why do we need three dozen?

I'm suggesting the status quo is perfectly adequate.

[Telecaster]

IMO if we're gonna have rant & chant threads again they should go in their own subforum. If I prefer not to look at mirrorless camera threads I can just skip the Mirrorless subforum. The same logic oughta apply in this case.

-Dave-

[Rob C]

IMO if we're gonna have rant & chant threads again they should go in their own subforum. If I prefer not to look at mirrorless camera threads I can just skip the Mirrorless subforum. The same logic oughta apply in this case.

-Dave-

Mirrorless is under Equipment and Techniques, just as R&C (nice one!) is under Coffee Corner, itself constructed for such topics as may not be strictly photographic in nature. No conflict that I can see. One could just as easily skip any topic the title/nature of which does not appeal, something I do every time I visit here.

Rob

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Another benefit of learning to read...

 

[faberryman]

We could call the politics subforum The Swamp.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Yes, snowflakes of the world, unite! Safe spaces for all!

[amolitor]

So that means that LuLa needs to compensate for the lack of self-control exhibited by folks without enough of it?

That sounds suspiciously like the "nanny state" so derided by some who object to regulations such as not smoking in restaurants, or even to the wearing of seat belts.

:-)

Well, the reality is that people are not particularly capable of resisting their baser urges. That's why we're fat, and drunk, and spend too much money on cameras.

I offer, here, no position on whether or not some assistance should be granted those who would prefer not be be embroiled, but find the temptation nonetheless, well, tempting. I point out merely that "well, exert some self-control, you weenies" will probably have limited effect.

[rabanito]

Another benefit of learning to read - using the topic titles to avoid all that strenuous button clicking.

Hmmmm...

You are right but sometimes the title can be misleading and even silly, hiding great pictures and also poor ones

With all the respect you deserve and just as an example:
You read something like
"Super picture of NZ PM "
You go there, open the link and what do you find?
No super picture there IMHO
I call that misleading. I wasted my clicks 

Mine was just an idea which I found worth discussing 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... sometimes the title can be misleading and even silly, hiding great pictures and also poor ones

With all the respect you deserve and just as an example:
You read something like
"Super picture of NZ PM "
You go there, open the link and what do you find?
No super picture there IMHO...

Indeed. Imagine my surprise when clicking on titles like "Spectacular Sunset on Playa..." 

[LesPalenik]

How about splitting the column in two, "Coffee Corner Photography" and "Coffee Corner Non-Photography"

What would be the correct procedure if someone posts a rhetorical question in the Non-Photography section, i.e. how to insert a picture in a post, and then some helpful soul wants to assist with an example using some hot image?

[rabanito]

What would be the correct procedure if someone posts a rhetorical question in the Non-Photography section, i.e. how to insert a picture in a post, and then some helpful soul wants to assist with an example using some hot image?

That is not a rhetorical question
A rhetorical question is a question someone asks without expecting an answer. The question might not have an answer, or it might have an obvious answer.

But anyway, I meant well. I would prefer things related to Trump, Brexit, Maduro or ISIS in a bin totally unrelated to photography when they are really non related to photography, photography being the only reason why I am here

That is just my opinion. As I said before, I have benefited very much from my membership at LULA so the topic is relatively irrelevant 

[Jeremy Roussak]

It's not going to happen. I see no benefit.

Jeremy

[Two23]

Aren't most of us just hitting "unread posts"  anyway?


Kent in SD

[Ivo_B]

It's cute to say "well just don't read it" but that is to completely ignore human nature.

Looking at instead of reading it, on the other hand, is perfectly humans nature.