<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Adaram</id>
		<title>Dragon Age Toolset Wiki - User contributions [en]</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Adaram"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Adaram"/>
		<updated>2026-08-03T14:07:00Z</updated>
		<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.25.6</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Feature_request:_Deleting_a_module&amp;diff=12263</id>
		<title>Feature request: Deleting a module</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Feature_request:_Deleting_a_module&amp;diff=12263"/>
				<updated>2010-03-01T20:43:38Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The current toolset does not allow for the deletion of a module that has been created.&lt;br /&gt;
Users typically initially create a bunch of test modules that cannot be removed, and forever after clutter up the list of modules.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a hacky workaround of deleting the module name manually from the database, but it just orphans all the modules resources without removing them from the database.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|210854|[[User:Allan Smith|Allan Smith]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Beware, this is by no means a clean and easy solution.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Deleting a Module from the Toolset ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Setup:&lt;br /&gt;
I created a module called Meep with a unique id of rcfMeep, added in one area with a waypoint, configured the starting area/waypoint info, and exported it with dependencies.  And now I want to strip it out.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Step 1: Removing it from the game&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Navigate to My Documents\Bioware\AddIns&lt;br /&gt;
* Delete the folder called rcfMeep&lt;br /&gt;
* Done&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Removing from the game is fairly easy.  The toolset?  Not so much.  The reason for this is that the information is stored in the SQL Database.  Now if you just want to remove the module from the Manage Modules list, that is easy.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Open Sql Server Management Studio Express.  I'm not sure if the default installation installs this or not.  If not, it can be downloaded from Microsoft.&lt;br /&gt;
* Connect to the BWDATOOLSET server, assuming that you kept the default options.&lt;br /&gt;
* Expand Databases&lt;br /&gt;
* Expand bw_dragonage_content&lt;br /&gt;
* Expand Tables&lt;br /&gt;
* Right click and select open table on the dbo.Module table&lt;br /&gt;
* This will bring up an excell-like window.  Find your module, right-click on the row, and select delete.  Say ok to the confirmation.&lt;br /&gt;
* Module is now PERMANENTLY removed.  Absolutely no way of recovering it.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Now depending on the size of the Module, you just orphaned a bunch of resources.  Areas, placables, conversations, they all get placed into the database.  And once you remove the module ID, you just lost your ability to remove these resources.  Now do keep in mind that 95% of this junk is just text, so it hardly takes up any room.  It's not really a major issue.  However if you delete out the resources within the toolset before you remove the module reference you should avoid this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Modules]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11893</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11893"/>
				<updated>2010-02-17T19:04:03Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Group/Project Discussion Tab */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 5-2010, this seems not to be working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion notifications ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be helpful to have e-mail notification of all posts in certain groups, to cover the case where posting is infrequent but important.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group/Project Discussion Tab ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When you initially click on the discussion tab, the list of topics should default in ascending order based on the thread with the most recent response.  Currently, in a busy discussion forum, it is very easy to miss discussions with replies due to the fact that they are buried inside other topics with older dated replies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Set default persona ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Allow users to set the default persona in their profile options. Some are in the unfortunate position of having multiple personas for no apparent reason, and to view their profiles you must browse through all persona pages until you locate the right one (and in some cases that isn't obvious at all). This would make it less of a hassle to view those users' profiles.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Custom portraits with DA:O ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People are figuring out how to override the DA:O character portraits locally and indirectly upload custom portraits that way. It has yet to become a problem (the ones I have seen so far have been in good taste) but if the practice spreads it will only be a matter of time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Filed as a bug because it's clearly not the intended use, but technically it isn't one and it might belong with the suggestions. I also doubt there's anything to do about this save for patching the game to encrypt the image and then have the site decrypt it (fat chance of that happening). But whatever.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project - update info ==&lt;br /&gt;
uploading new file (even if you place it as featured file) don't change project &amp;quot;Updated Date&amp;quot; info.&lt;br /&gt;
Result : project search with update date filter don't give usefull result.&lt;br /&gt;
E.g : project created on december 2009 with first file released placed on jan2010....-&amp;gt; update date is december 2009 .. ??&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|215184|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Friends search on Proficiencies ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Appears to be completely broken. For example, searching for my own community name works, but not if I check Scripting. In general, checking any proficiency box appears to produce zero results.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11892</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11892"/>
				<updated>2010-02-17T19:03:49Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Other */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 5-2010, this seems not to be working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion notifications ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be helpful to have e-mail notification of all posts in certain groups, to cover the case where posting is infrequent but important.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group/Project Discussion Tab ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When you initially click on the discussion tab, the list of topics should default in ascending order based on the thread with the most recent response.  Currently, in a busy discussion forum, it is very easy to miss discussions with replies due to the fact that they are buried inside other topics with older dated replies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Set default persona ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Allow users to set the default persona in their profile options. Some are in the unfortunate position of having multiple personas for no apparent reason, and to view their profiles you must browse through all persona pages until you locate the right one (and in some cases that isn't obvious at all). This would make it less of a hassle to view those users' profiles.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Custom portraits with DA:O ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People are figuring out how to override the DA:O character portraits locally and indirectly upload custom portraits that way. It has yet to become a problem (the ones I have seen so far have been in good taste) but if the practice spreads it will only be a matter of time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Filed as a bug because it's clearly not the intended use, but technically it isn't one and it might belong with the suggestions. I also doubt there's anything to do about this save for patching the game to encrypt the image and then have the site decrypt it (fat chance of that happening). But whatever.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project - update info ==&lt;br /&gt;
uploading new file (even if you place it as featured file) don't change project &amp;quot;Updated Date&amp;quot; info.&lt;br /&gt;
Result : project search with update date filter don't give usefull result.&lt;br /&gt;
E.g : project created on december 2009 with first file released placed on jan2010....-&amp;gt; update date is december 2009 .. ??&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|215184|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Friends search on Proficiencies ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Appears to be completely broken. For example, searching for my own community name works, but not if I check Scripting. In general, checking any proficiency box appears to produce zero results.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11073</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11073"/>
				<updated>2010-02-08T19:30:52Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 5-2010, this seems not to be working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion notifications ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be helpful to have e-mail notification of all posts in certain groups, to cover the case where posting is infrequent but important.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Set default persona ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Allow users to set the default persona in their profile options. Some are in the unfortunate position of having multiple personas for no apparent reason, and to view their profiles you must browse through all persona pages until you locate the right one (and in some cases that isn't obvious at all). This would make it less of a hassle to view those users' profiles.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Custom portraits with DA:O ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People are figuring out how to override the DA:O character portraits locally and indirectly upload custom portraits that way. It has yet to become a problem (the ones I have seen so far have been in good taste) but if the practice spreads it will only be a matter of time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Filed as a bug because it's clearly not the intended use, but technically it isn't one and it might belong with the suggestions. I also doubt there's anything to do about this save for patching the game to encrypt the image and then have the site decrypt it (fat chance of that happening). But whatever.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project - update info ==&lt;br /&gt;
uploading new file (even if you place it as featured file) don't change project &amp;quot;Updated Date&amp;quot; info.&lt;br /&gt;
Result : project search with update date filter don't give usefull result.&lt;br /&gt;
E.g : project created on december 2009 with first file released placed on jan2010....-&amp;gt; update date is december 2009 .. ??&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|215184|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11072</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11072"/>
				<updated>2010-02-08T19:30:28Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 8-2010, this seems not to be working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion notifications ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be helpful to have e-mail notification of all posts in certain groups, to cover the case where posting is infrequent but important.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Set default persona ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Allow users to set the default persona in their profile options. Some are in the unfortunate position of having multiple personas for no apparent reason, and to view their profiles you must browse through all persona pages until you locate the right one (and in some cases that isn't obvious at all). This would make it less of a hassle to view those users' profiles.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Custom portraits with DA:O ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People are figuring out how to override the DA:O character portraits locally and indirectly upload custom portraits that way. It has yet to become a problem (the ones I have seen so far have been in good taste) but if the practice spreads it will only be a matter of time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Filed as a bug because it's clearly not the intended use, but technically it isn't one and it might belong with the suggestions. I also doubt there's anything to do about this save for patching the game to encrypt the image and then have the site decrypt it (fat chance of that happening). But whatever.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project - update info ==&lt;br /&gt;
uploading new file (even if you place it as featured file) don't change project &amp;quot;Updated Date&amp;quot; info.&lt;br /&gt;
Result : project search with update date filter don't give usefull result.&lt;br /&gt;
E.g : project created on december 2009 with first file released placed on jan2010....-&amp;gt; update date is december 2009 .. ??&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|215184|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11071</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=11071"/>
				<updated>2010-02-08T19:30:18Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 8-2010, this seems not to be working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion notifications ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be helpful to have e-mail notification of all posts in certain groups, to cover the case where posting is infrequent but important.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Set default persona ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Allow users to set the default persona in their profile options. Some are in the unfortunate position of having multiple personas for no apparent reason, and to view their profiles you must browse through all persona pages until you locate the right one (and in some cases that isn't obvious at all). This would make it less of a hassle to view those users' profiles.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Custom portraits with DA:O ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People are figuring out how to override the DA:O character portraits locally and indirectly upload custom portraits that way. It has yet to become a problem (the ones I have seen so far have been in good taste) but if the practice spreads it will only be a matter of time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Filed as a bug because it's clearly not the intended use, but technically it isn't one and it might belong with the suggestions. I also doubt there's anything to do about this save for patching the game to encrypt the image and then have the site decrypt it (fat chance of that happening). But whatever.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project - update info ==&lt;br /&gt;
uploading new file (even if you place it as featured file) don't change project &amp;quot;Updated Date&amp;quot; info.&lt;br /&gt;
Result : project search with update date filter don't give usefull result.&lt;br /&gt;
E.g : project created on december 2009 with first file released placed on jan2010....-&amp;gt; update date is december 2009 .. ??&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|215184|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10805</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10805"/>
				<updated>2010-02-02T17:47:06Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Edit''' as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working as requested&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10804</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10804"/>
				<updated>2010-02-02T17:46:18Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Project management suggestions]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
**Edit as at Feb 2-2010, this seems to be a feature that is working**&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10741</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10741"/>
				<updated>2010-02-01T16:19:18Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Projects */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. It would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Other project filter options ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
* Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
* Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
* I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Rating projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Problems with the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Variation and changes to the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Download counting ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project classification ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects to be categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Subscribed projects view ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under ''View'', add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project Comments ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments first. Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  In the case of a project that has 190 comments, for example, that means one has to click Next Page 19 times!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Captchas in project forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Extend valid file types for projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accommodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extensions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See: [http://social.bioware.com/project/334/discussion/586/|Little Red Riding Hood Redux] for the example&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project/Group &amp;quot;Discussions&amp;quot; ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Project and Group discussion areas should be replaced with full &amp;quot;Forum&amp;quot; functionality.  The owner of the Group/Project should have the ability to assign Moderators.  They should be able to set up Forum Areas, Sticky Posts, Moderate, and do all other things that a Moderator might otherwise be able to do.  This would allow for a lot more flexibility and &amp;quot;site stickiness&amp;quot; for groups of people that do things together.  Also, any upgrades to the forums functionality could be added to this construct at the same time, thereby eliminating the need for two sets of codebase for what is virtually the same activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10740</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10740"/>
				<updated>2010-02-01T15:22:03Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Projects */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project/Group &amp;quot;Discussions&amp;quot; ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Project and Group discussion areas should be replaced with full &amp;quot;Forum&amp;quot; functionality.  The owner of the Group/Project should have the ability to assign Moderators.  They should be able to set up Forum Areas, Sticky Posts, Moderate, and do all other things that a Moderator might otherwise be able to do.  This would allow for a lot more flexibility and &amp;quot;site stickiness&amp;quot; for groups of people that do things together.  Also, any upgrades to the forums functionality could be added to this construct at the same time, thereby eliminating the need for two sets of codebase for what is virtually the same activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. It would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Other project filter options ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
* Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
* Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
* I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Rating projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Problems with the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Variation and changes to the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Download counting ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project classification ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects to be categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Subscribed projects view ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under ''View'', add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project Comments ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments first. Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  In the case of a project that has 190 comments, for example, that means one has to click Next Page 19 times!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Captchas in project forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Extend valid file types for projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accommodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extensions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See: [http://social.bioware.com/project/334/discussion/586/|Little Red Riding Hood Redux] for the example&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group discussion thread moderation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The ability to delete posts is of little value. When the only message is ''this post has been deleted'', with no cause, it can lead to confusion and headaches when trying to resolve issues. Allowing officers to edit posts (also leaving a note, ala BioBoards) would be much more useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Group member titles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering these are only shown on the member and officer lists, these seem pointless. If they are not displayed when posting they may as well be removed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Registered game promotions ordering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sort by (platform, game, title) or (game, title, platform). Right now there appears to be no system to the order of entitlements.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10404</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10404"/>
				<updated>2010-01-27T22:16:57Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Forums */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. It would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Other project filter options ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
* Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
* Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
* I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Rating projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Problems with the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Variation and changes to the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Download counting ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project classification ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects to be categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Subscribed projects view ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under ''View'', add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project Comments ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments first. Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  In the case of a project that has 190 comments, for example, that means one has to click Next Page 19 times!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Captchas in project forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Extend valid file types for projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accommodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extensions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See: [http://social.bioware.com/project/334/discussion/586/|Little Red Riding Hood Redux] for the example&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===More ME Forum Subdivisions===&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to see seperate forums, like for ME1, for PC and console gameplay. The issues that each demographic face and are concerend are different. The old division of : General Discussion, Spoiler Discussion, X-Box Game Play, PC Game play, X Box Tech, PC Tech worked great I thought. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, it would cut down of the pictures of face palms and such I have to deal with.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10311</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10311"/>
				<updated>2010-01-26T20:43:01Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Other */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Other project filter options ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Rating projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Problems with the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Variation and changes to the current rating system ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Download counting ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project classification ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Subscribed projects view ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under ''View'', add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Comments on projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Captchas in project forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Project comments -- show newest comments first ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments FIRST!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  I have a project that has roughly 190 comments.  That means I have to click Next Page 19 times!!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Extend valid file types for projects ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accommodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extensions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See: [http://social.bioware.com/project/334/discussion/586/|Little Red Riding Hood Redux] for the example&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jumping to specific posts off the Feed Page ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Contract/expand social site forums ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click ''Forums.'' Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Forum filtering ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please can we have a way of filtering the ''Recent Forum Posts'' section on the home page. People still insist on putting spoilers in titles and being the &amp;quot;most recent&amp;quot; means they appear before a moderator has had chance to edit them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related: can we have the ability to filter our recent activity by forum so that we can hide spoiler forums for the same reason (and to hide forums we aren't interested in).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Jump directly to ''Your Post'' from the ''Your Posts'' list ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the ''Your posts'' thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Edit post =&amp;gt; redirect ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editing a post takes you to the start of the thread. It should take you to the page in the thread your post is on, ideally the post itself.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Recent post entry should go to first unread ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When there is support for it, assuming there will be, clicking an entry in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should take you to the first unread post in the thread. Without proper context the last post is useless anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Duplicate forum navigation tree ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Display the forum navigation tree (e.g. ''Forum Home » BioWare General » Social.bioware.com Site Help'') at the bottom of the forum as well. Currently it exists only at the top, and having to scroll all the way up after reaching the end of a page gets annoying.&lt;br /&gt;
===Better search function===&lt;br /&gt;
When search for a specific topic the search function only displays posts with the topic in the title but unfortunately most users use &amp;quot;have a problem&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;toolset issue&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;need help&amp;quot; as title for their post. The search function should look for the specified word inside the posts to give more results to have a look at.&lt;br /&gt;
Because of that limitation there are about 10 or even more topics about changing a head morph which essentially have the same questions with the same answers in them...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Make use of ''title'' attributes ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For anchor and image tags especially, using the ''title'' tags would greatly increase the site's usability. Icons should have their meaning added, entries in the ''Recent Forum Posts'' list should have the full topic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Remove HTML support ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Comment boxes make mention of very limited HTML tag support. It should be removed in favour of BBCode. There's no point in having both and 1) BBCode is safer/smoother, and 2) likely much better known.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Quote box layout ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The source doesn't stand apart from the quote and a timestamp would be greatly appreciated. Dotted and dashed borders also cause some wonkiness, as illustrated by [http://i36.tinypic.com/jgh2s9.jpg this picture].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Navigating group discussion threads ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clicking ''Quote'' currently jumps you directly to the reply form at the bottom of the page. This is extremely annoying if you haven't already read the entire page (in which case you would be at the reply form anyway) or need to quote multiple people. Although it serves as feedback to inform the user that the action was registered, and removing it could imply that it's broken, the break in flow there exists now is undesirable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Additionally, when going back and forth (previous/next page), contents of the reply form should be retained. This will make it easier to reply to multiple posts across several pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Report XX to moderators ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Due primarily to timezone obstacles, reporting posts, users, etc. straight to moderators can be very inefficient, which in turn means it is not done as often as it perhaps should be. The ability to make a single report accessible by all moderators, such that it can be dealt with by anyone present, would be a huge boon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Relabel My Games to My Game Profiles ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Per djes: That sidebar menu should really be labelled &amp;quot;My Game Profiles&amp;quot; - since ME2 doesn't upload much at all, it's not really expected to show up there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Social Site Bug Reporting Area =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10030</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10030"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T19:26:04Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts off the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Comments -- Show Newest Comments first==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments FIRST!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  I have a project that has roughly 190 comments.  That means I have to click Next Page 19 times!!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contract/Expand Social Site Forums==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click &amp;quot;Forums&amp;quot;. Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Extend Valid File Types for Projects==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
social.bioware.com/52/albums/16/10932&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accomodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extentions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jump directly to &amp;quot;Your Post&amp;quot; from the &amp;quot;Your Posts&amp;quot; List==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the &amp;quot;Your posts&amp;quot; thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Thanks in advance.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=Social Site Bug Reporting Area=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10029</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10029"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T19:25:09Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts off the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Comments -- Show Newest Comments first==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments FIRST!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  I have a project that has roughly 190 comments.  That means I have to click Next Page 19 times!!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contract/Expand Social Site Forums==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click &amp;quot;Forums&amp;quot;. Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Extend Valid File Types for Projects==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
social.bioware.com/52/albums/16/10932&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accomodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extentions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jump directly to &amp;quot;Your Post&amp;quot; from the &amp;quot;Your Posts&amp;quot; List==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heya, I love the &amp;quot;Your posts&amp;quot; thing, but is there a way to directly jump to my particular post in the listed topics? Instead of picking a page or going to last post, that is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Thanks in advance.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=Social Site Bug Reporting Area=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10028</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10028"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T19:21:28Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Comments -- Show Newest Comments first==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments FIRST!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  I have a project that has roughly 190 comments.  That means I have to click Next Page 19 times!!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contract/Expand Social Site Forums==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click &amp;quot;Forums&amp;quot;. Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Extend Valid File Types for Projects==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
social.bioware.com/52/albums/16/10932&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I created (what is now) a DA Playable Modules project.  In addition to uploading the module (DAZIP) file I want to upload the builder-to-builder (DADBDATA) file and the art resources (in this case just LVL files) so that the community could see how we made the module. However the valid types for a DA Playable Modules project do not allow these file types.  I am loathe to made another project simply to accomodate these additional file types so I am requesting the project's file types be extended to allow all extentions associated with Dragon Age and ZIP/RAR in addition to the ones already allowed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10027</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10027"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T19:17:46Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Comments -- Show Newest Comments first==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments FIRST!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  I have a project that has roughly 190 comments.  That means I have to click Next Page 19 times!!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contract/Expand Social Site Forums==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can you guys add the contract/expand forum section like old BioBoard has? (with the keep settings for next time I open the browser too)  I don't want ME forum taking over the whole top of my monitor when I click &amp;quot;Forums&amp;quot;. Thank you! (not for now, at least... after I get it, perhaps!  =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10026</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=10026"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T19:13:57Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Project Comments -- Show Newest Comments first==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please show the latest comments FIRST!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently when you go to view comments under a project, it shows the very first comments.  It is supposed to show the newest comments first.  I have a project that has roughly 190 comments.  That means I have to click Next Page 19 times!!!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214171|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{EV|214174|[[User:BryanDerksen|BryanDerksen]]}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9996</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9996"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T16:21:28Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
* Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
* Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9995</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9995"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T16:17:06Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Social Site Bug Reporting Area */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Private Group Posts showing to non-Group members in Personal Feed===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OK. Here is a summary of the BUG, in case it hasn't been reported (but I think it has). To reproduce the BUG, do the following:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. In Profile, Privacy Options, enable (check on) &amp;quot;Starting a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Posting in a Project Discussion Topic&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
2. Go to one of your private projects.&lt;br /&gt;
3. Post a New Discussion Topic&lt;br /&gt;
4. Ask one of your friends that is not part of the Private Project to review your feed ... they will tell you that they can see both the New Topic and the Reply in your feed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you un-flag the two items you had flagged, your friend won't see the topics anymore (new ones)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This tells me that the Privacy Options are working as intended, but they are not being over-ridden by the privacy options on the project profile. In my opinion, you should be able to show project discussions through your feed, however, the privacy of the project should over-ride that setting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9994</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9994"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T16:14:18Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9993</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9993"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T16:13:32Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Jumping to specific Posts of the Feed Page===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would be nice to be able to jump directly to the post that was made by the person in my Network (friends, etc.) off the Feed Page.  Currently, you can jump to the thread, but when threads are lots of pages long, you often have to go hunting to see what your buddy wrote in that topic.  Having a way to jump directly to their specific post in the Topic would be very helpful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9992</id>
		<title>Social site suggestions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Social_site_suggestions&amp;diff=9992"/>
				<updated>2010-01-22T16:10:40Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This page is intended as a collaborative repository for suggestions on how to improve the social site. Create a new section for each specific suggestion or related group of suggestions. Feel free to discuss them to some extent on this page, but bear in mind that discussions should be refactored every once in a while into a summary of the idea - the purpose of this page is to consolidate discussion into a more easily-referenced form.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project &amp;quot;progress&amp;quot; status ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Too hard to tell if a project is done or in progress or abandoned.&lt;br /&gt;
* There is no filter option or way to mark your project as completed and ready for use. Would be nice if projects could be given a completion attribute (i.e. planning, building, alpha testing, beta testing, released, etc).&lt;br /&gt;
* Abandoned projects clutter up the list enormously. Projects should be automatically disabled or flagged if there is no activity in them for some threshold criteria length of time and they remain incomplete/never started.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Other filter options ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Advanced Filter Options button. Currently the drop-down boxes for filtering are all independent of one another. If you want to browse in the groups there are 4 lists. Would be nice to have an advanced filtering options button that will pop up a little dialog box where you can make all your selections at once and then say GO!&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects with fewer than X members.&lt;br /&gt;
** Would be nice to be able to filter out completely all those projects that haven't had any activity at all for X days.&lt;br /&gt;
** I would also like to see the author of the project without opening it up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* When you click on projects the list can only be viewed 10 items at a time, which is way to few.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Redundant filters: Some of the drop down options are not something anybody would be interested in listing them by or are duplicated by others (e.g. popularity? most views? what is the difference between those two?). Ordering by most views is unlikely to generate a significantly different ordering than sorting by last updated or popularity. All the older projects are likely to have more views than the any of the newer ones, so ordering by create date isn't going to be significantly different than ordering by most views. This isn't a major problem, frankly more options are better than fewer, but the ones you really need (which projects are &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; and which are &amp;quot;not worth the effort&amp;quot;, which are done which are still in progress) aren't there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Rating projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Problems with the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The modules that have been around the longest will have the most &amp;quot;+&amp;quot; while a brand new awesome module may never get noticed. This encourages builders to do a rush job just so they can be one of the first ones out there. Perhaps a weighted rating system, so that a very large/old mod can sit up their with a brand new smaller mod of equal caliber that just hasn't garnered the high amount of ratings yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Provide a checkbox on a project that a host can check when he/she considers the content &amp;quot;done&amp;quot; and ready to be ranked with the others. This would allow you to post work-in-progress downloads to gather feedback, without the concern of getting low ranks because it is not done yet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Once you have given a project a &amp;quot;+&amp;quot;, there is no way to remove that again, even if you discover later that the project didn't deserve it at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Variation and changes to the current rating system===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Have two ways to rate projects -- one similar to the NWVault's rating system (is it a good idea, do people like it, etc), and another where people could rate the &amp;quot;buggyness&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;stability&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;ease of setup&amp;quot; type things about the project.?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Or perhaps just a screen with two or three categories to rate that get computed into some overall rating (e.g. Design/Idea 1-10, Stability/Ease of Use 1-10, Something Else 1-10). For me it would be far more useful to be able to filter and sort on these kinds of peer judged criteria than by &amp;quot;most views&amp;quot; or a generic &amp;quot;popularity&amp;quot; with unclear basis.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Maybe projects need a sex rating system similar to what hollywood does (e.g. G, PG, PG13...XXX).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* NWVault has a rating system where you give a 0-10 score, but the rating is hidden until a specific minimum number of people have rated the project.  The average number may be meaningless - in NWNvault, an absurdly high percentage of modules have a rating above 9.0, but still the relative ranking is pretty good - a module with a high score and a high download count is probably worth looking at..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Download counting ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You cannot update a file without losing the download count - it gets reset back to zero.  This would need to be fixed - the ideal solution would be to count the number of people downloading files from the project, but at the very least allow people to update files without losing the download count.  As it is, the download count is pointless and actually discourages builders from updating their files.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Project classification ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* If a project got incorrectly classified originally, or if a more appropriate category is added later, there is no way to re-classify the project. Allow module owners to change the category of their projects.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The list of classifications is a mess, with builder-to-builder and builder-to-player categories mixed up.   Also, the categories are not well chosen -  the NWN modules category is just a pointless waste of space and several categories seem to be missing.&lt;br /&gt;
** Add more project categories (areas, scripts, machinima, tutorials, music, and so on)&lt;br /&gt;
** Separate builder-to-player content from builder-to-builder content. The biggest hurdle to mod creation is creating levels, so a level category would be particularly useful.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Categories to potentially remove or change:&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN module&lt;br /&gt;
* It is a bit confusing to have &amp;quot;Dragon Age Addons&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;DA Gameplay mods&amp;quot;, as to most people those categories overlap.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Replace the one-big-list project page with a splash page with links to separate categories. Include an &amp;quot;all mods&amp;quot; button so we can still get to the huge list if we want to. And allow mods to be in more than one category.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The list of project categories, in order, at the time of writing is&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Dragon Age addons&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Playable Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA Utilities&lt;br /&gt;
* Builder - DA VO files&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Gameplay Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Item/Armor/Weapon Mods&lt;br /&gt;
* DA Character Mods&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whether or not these names are final, and even though it may not be all that relevant at the moment, I think the list should be sorted either by category or game, in alphabetical order, and that games only be represented in their short form. E.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* Modules - NWN&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* Textures - DA(:O)&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
or&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Textures&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - Utilities (what are those anyway?)&lt;br /&gt;
* DA(:O) - VO Files&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
* NWN - Modules&lt;br /&gt;
* ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Alternative approach to classification: tags instead of categories ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Too many/too unspecific categories can cause similar projects are categorized differently because they fit under too many categories. I would suggest only a very general level of categorization and leave the specifics to tags. For instance, allow only a single category for game modules but let the author assign Gameplay, Item, and Character (and any other) tags as applicable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two things that would definitely have to be considered for such a solution are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if the tags are gathered in one global list, some tags will not make any sense whatsoever for certain projects. On the other hand, category exclusive lists seems like a lot of database bloat, and what do you do when the tag(s) you're looking for are not (yet) in the category your project is in?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* if only the author can assign tags, risk of vandalism is greatly reduced, not to say eliminated. Meanwhile, allowing all users to add/remove tags to/from projects greatly increases the likelihood of the average project being more appropriately categorized (tagged).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Subscribed projects view ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under &amp;quot;View&amp;quot;, add &amp;quot;Subscribed projects&amp;quot; - once I have found projects that are sufficiently interesting to want to follow them, I want to be able to find them again easily.  Not everyone knows of http://social.bioware.com/user_bw_projects_subscriptions.php&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Comments on projects ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The comments on Projects is horrible. If they can be made so you can have more than 10 per page and be able to jump to any page in the comments they'd be much better.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Captchas in project forums ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Could we drop having to solve a captcha to post in a project forum? It ties into the problem above about the comment system, which is all the captcha system probably reinforces, and seems kind of pointless given how somebody could just spam up the comments anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Social Site Bug Reporting Area==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Initially, let's use this little area on the suggestions page for bug reporting.  Ultimately, it would be good to have a separate page like the one that exists for the Toolset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Project Discussions, Next Page &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Button leads to 404 Error===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are two places to click &amp;quot;Next Page&amp;quot; in the project discussions area.  One at the top, and one at the bottom.  The one at the top works fine, but the one at the bottom leads to a 404 error page&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Feature requests]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=BITM_base.xls&amp;diff=9133</id>
		<title>BITM base.xls</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=BITM_base.xls&amp;diff=9133"/>
				<updated>2010-01-01T23:09:38Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Defines base items, such as &amp;quot;Weapon - Longsword&amp;quot;, used in the item editor.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Several worksheets in this Excel file are not actual 2DAs, they are present only for informational purposes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A note when editing:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*SourceData - This is the worksheet where the information for the 2da should be edited.&lt;br /&gt;
*BITM_base - This worksheet is a mirror of the data from SourceData (but only the columns that the game cares about)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== BITM_base worksheet ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da start|BITM_base}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Label | string | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| NameStrRef | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DescStrRef | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| InvSlotWidth | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| InvSlotHeight | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| EquippableSlots | int | A bitfield indicating which slots the item can be equipped into. See the _EquipSlots worksheet for an explanation of these values. }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WearR |int | Index into the [[parts.xls]] file. Indicates where right hand weapons are worn on the body.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WearL |int| Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where left hand weapons are worn on the body.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WieldR|int| Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where wielded right hand weapons are attached in combat.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WieldL |int| Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where wielded left hand weapons are attached in combat.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Heraldry |bool| Whether or not items using this base type can have heraldry applied}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| CanRotateIcon | bool | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| TargetType | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Variation_WorkSheet | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DefaultMaterial | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DefaultModel | string | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DefaultIcon | string | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DefaultResource | string | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WeaponWield | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WieldModel | string | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| WieldModelOverlay | string | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| CombatRating | float | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| StrengthModifier | float | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| BaseDamage | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| StackSize | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Type| int| The meanings of these values can be found in the ItemTypes worksheet in this document.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Speed| int | Slow = 1, Medium = 2, Fast = 3. Note: Check [[AttackSpeeds.xls]] for details}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Range|float| Distance is in meters.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Projectile | int| If the item can be fired as a projectile (e.g. arrows), this field should relate to a projectile in PRJ 2da.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ProjectileOffset| float| Height distance to move a projectile launch position relative to the hand of the user. }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Ammo |int| Which base item type serves as ammo for this item}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| StorePanel | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ModalAbilityBlendTree |int| Specifies if the item is able to work with modal ability blend trees. This is currently only relevant for MAIN and OFFHAND slot items.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| InvSoundType |int| ID sound materials defined in &amp;quot;[[Sound_Item_Materials.xls]]&amp;quot;}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ArmorType| int| 2 - medium, 3 - heavy, 4 - massive, 5 - cloth}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DoNotDrop |int| if true, the treasure system will never drop this item.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ReqProp1 | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ReqProp1Val | float | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ReqProp2 | int | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ReqProp2Val | float | {{undocumented}} }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| piercingtype| int| 1 bladed, 2 blunt, 3 ranged}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| RuneSlots |int| Mask  for the rune slot (same as equipment slots)}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| RuneCount |int| Base number of runes. Note that 0 and even negative numbers can be increased into positive by the material types, so we use a rather large negative number to prevent runes on most items.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| SoundVariation |int| Specifies the sound variation for each object type. Note that 0 means the default sound is used: cloth for armor, sharp weapon for weapons and generic for everything else.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| IsHeavy | int | Considered to be heavy for dual wielding purposes. Requires dual wielding mastery to equip in the offhand. }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ShowMaterial | int | If an item of this base type should show its material type in the inventory UI. }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| SuppressPropertyVFX | bool | Avoid displaying a VFX that would be added through item properties }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da end}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== ItemStats worksheet ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da start|ItemStats}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Label | string | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Attack | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Damage | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| DamageRange | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Armor | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| ArmorPenetration | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Defense | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| BaseAimDelay | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Dspeed | float| Speed change within style from default anim speed.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| CritChanceModifier | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| AbilityCostModifier | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| MissileDeflection | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| OptimumRange | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| SpellPower | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| RngdPenalty | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| AttributeMod | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Attribute0 | int | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Attribute1 | int | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da end}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== itemstatdefines worksheet ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da start|itemstatdefines}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Label |string| This label must match the name of the column where this stat is found in the BITM_base 2da.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| NameStrRef |int| }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| CreatureProp |int| This number is the ID of the creature property that this item stat affects. When the item is equipped, the creature property will automatically be modified by the value found for this stat in the BITM_base.}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| bShowInUI|int|}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Precision |int|Number of decimal places to show in the UI}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da end}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== ArmorData worksheet ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da start|ArmorData}}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Label | string| }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Chest | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Boots | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Gloves | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Helmet | float | }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da column| Total| comment| }}&lt;br /&gt;
{{2da end}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== _SourceData worksheet ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This worksheet is not exported directly as a 2DA file.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Name - If the rows or columns change, macros need updating&lt;br /&gt;
* (no label) - an ID column&lt;br /&gt;
* Label&lt;br /&gt;
* NameStrRef - A string ID that leads to a string with the name of this kind of item. For example, boots have an English string that reads &amp;quot;Boot&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
* DescStrRef&lt;br /&gt;
* InvSlotWidth&lt;br /&gt;
* InvSlotHeight&lt;br /&gt;
* InvSoundType&lt;br /&gt;
* EquippableSlots - a bitfield indicating which inventory slots the item can be equipped in.&lt;br /&gt;
* WearR - Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where right hand weapons are worn on the body.&lt;br /&gt;
* WearL - Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where left hand weapons are worn on the body.&lt;br /&gt;
* WieldR - Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where wielded right hand weapons are attached in combat.&lt;br /&gt;
* WieldL - Index into the parts.xls file. Indicates where wielded left hand weapons are attached in combat.&lt;br /&gt;
* CanRotateIcon&lt;br /&gt;
* TargetType&lt;br /&gt;
* Variation_WorkSheet&lt;br /&gt;
* DefaultModel&lt;br /&gt;
* DefaultIcon&lt;br /&gt;
* WeaponWield&lt;br /&gt;
* WieldModel&lt;br /&gt;
* CombatRating&lt;br /&gt;
* StrengthModifier - How strength damage is scaled when using this weapon.&lt;br /&gt;
* BaseDamage&lt;br /&gt;
* ArmourPenetration - Rules. Design-Materials. Armor penetrating capability of this weapon. Serves dual purpose. Also the field for the ARMOR value of Armor. This is also used for the shield base modifier&lt;br /&gt;
* ArmourValue&lt;br /&gt;
* Attribute - This is an index into the attribute.xls. It iis used by rules to determine the required attribute score.&lt;br /&gt;
* AttributeValue&lt;br /&gt;
* StackSize&lt;br /&gt;
* MinItemProps&lt;br /&gt;
* MaxItemProps&lt;br /&gt;
* PropColumn - This column references ItemProperties.xls (the ItemPropDef page). It assigns each item into a category. Tools then uses this to figure out which properties are allowed for each item type.&lt;br /&gt;
* StartingCharges&lt;br /&gt;
* QBBehaviour&lt;br /&gt;
* StorePanel&lt;br /&gt;
* StorePanelSort&lt;br /&gt;
* Type&lt;br /&gt;
* Speed&lt;br /&gt;
* BaseDamageReduction&lt;br /&gt;
* AttackExtra&lt;br /&gt;
* BaseDefenseBonus&lt;br /&gt;
* Type&lt;br /&gt;
* BaseArmorPenetration&lt;br /&gt;
* LightArmor&lt;br /&gt;
* AbilityScoreRequired&lt;br /&gt;
* BasePreReqAbility&lt;br /&gt;
* StaminaUpkeep&lt;br /&gt;
* BaseDamage&lt;br /&gt;
* StrengthModifierMultiplier&lt;br /&gt;
* AbilityScoreRequired2&lt;br /&gt;
* BasePreReqAbility2&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== _EquipSlots worksheet ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This worksheet is not exported directly as a 2DA file.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*LABEL&lt;br /&gt;
*MASK&lt;br /&gt;
*SET1&lt;br /&gt;
*SET2&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2DAs]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Items]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Talk:How-tos&amp;diff=8023</id>
		<title>Talk:How-tos</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Talk:How-tos&amp;diff=8023"/>
				<updated>2009-11-20T17:37:21Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: /* Deleting modules from toolset/database */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== How-to's that might be nice to add ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Add a custom area to the main campaign world map (like how DLC locations are added)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Equip the player with a custom item in the main campaign (see [http://social.bioware.com/5339/blog/576/ http://social.bioware.com/5339/blog/576/] )&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[User:Avantoreon|Avantoreon]] 18:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Deleting modules from toolset/database ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Okay, maybe it's just me and however my SQL Server Management Studio Express is set up (default settings), but I found ripping module info out of it nowhere near as easy as the how-to made it sound.  I had one module (Demo_1) with two areas; an area transition door/waypoint combo in both areas, a start waypoint and a firepit/sound object in one of the areas.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Followed the instructions to open the Modules table (called dbo.t_Module for me), found the row with Demo_1 on, selected it and pressed delete...wham!  Error message effectively saying 'can't delete this, another table refers to it'.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ookay...so off I go to find that table (dbo.t_ModuleResRef).  Sure enough, there's a few rows at the bottom with Demo_1's ID number in the ModuleID column.  Fine; select the bottom-most row, pressed delete...wham - again!  This row &amp;lt;i&amp;gt;also&amp;lt;/i&amp;gt; has another table referring to it.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Off I go again, this time to table dbo.t_ModuleResRefVersion  Once more there's a handful of rows at the bottom with Demo_1's ID number in the ModuleID and matching ResRefIDs for the rows in the table before that I'd just tried to delete.  By this point I'm actually considering praying before selecting a row and hitting delete...  Maybe I should have.  Yep, you guessed it - off to find another table.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
So this time the table is dbo.t_Placeable, which gives me some hope that maybe, just maybe, this is the end of the reference chain (I prayed, just to be on the safe side!).  Not as easy to find what I was looking for, the rows here I had to cross-reference with the ModuleResRefVersion IDs from the previous table - no simple module IDs to help here.  Find a row that matches, select, (pray), delete...  Success!&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Up the table I go, carefully checking ModuleResRefVersion IDs and deleting the rows associated with the module I'm exterminating.  Once they're all gone, it's back to the ModuleResRefVersion table itself.  Select the row that wouldn't let me delete it before, aaand... another 'can't delete this, another table refers to it' error...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
So, in the epically long dbo.t_StringVersion table, seek and destroy all the relevant rows with ModuleResRefVersion IDs that I no longer want...only to find, yep, need to weed them out of dbo.t_StringText first.  dbo.t_StringText weeded successfully, I go back to dbo.t_StringVersion and breathe a sigh of relief when that now lets the rows be removed.  Take 2 for the ModuleResRefVersion table.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
And this time that works as well...to a point.  That point being (if you have resource names you can identify easily) where I'd managed to delete all the placeable information and tried to delete the area information.  Unsurprisingly (by this point), this sent me off to dbo.t_Area which sent me to dbo.t_AreaInstanceAssociations - I only had one entry in this table, possibly because I'd only created the one module at this point.  Back to dbo.t_Area, only to find that I needed to edit dbo.t_AreaWaypoint (3 rows corresponding to each of my 3 waypoints), and then dbo.t_AreaObject which sent me to dbo.t_AreaObjectVariable (4 rows; two for each area transition door).  Finally back to dbo.t_Area again aaand, off to dbo.t_AreaSound (the firepit's sound object) - another table with just the one row.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Fiiinally, dbo.t_Area is free of ModuleResRefVersion IDs for my Demo(n) module!  Back to the ModuleResRefVersion table and delete the last references in there.  Back to the ModuleResRef table and delete all the appropriate module references in there.  And finally, finally, back to the table that started it all, the Module table, and delete the module reference in there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All that, just to delete a basic module consisting of 2 Areas, 2 (transition) Doors, 3 Waypoints, 1 Firepit and 1 Sound Object.  Why oh why could there not be a simple 'delete' option for modules within the toolset itself? [[User:ZGold|ZGold]] 10:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: Just to add; I'd already deleted the resources (placeables, areas etc.) from the module in the toolset before I went rooting around in the SQL. [[User:ZGold|ZGold]] 10:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Hmm oddish.  Worked fine for me and I didn't even bother to delete anything.  I'll poke around some more.  Might be a moot point as I am working on a Stored Procedure to remove all the references. [[User:Languard|Languard]] 14:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:: like I said, it could be something in the default setup of the SQL manager *shrugs* - a couple of additional notes; I found the string editor in the toolset was still refering to a talk table for my deleted module, I had to go back into the SQL and delete the appropriate reference from the dbo.t_String and dbo.t_StringTable tables; also, after the first round of deleting things from the SQL tables when I tried to load the editor it threw up a series of errors - whether that had anything to do with the module I deleted having been the last open (and thus 'open by default') module, or not, I'm not sure, but after agreeing that the toolset could open the default module (single player) and trying to run the editor again, it ran fine.  Thought I'd mention that just in case anyone has the same thing happen and panics :P [[User:ZGold|ZGold]] 17:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:: You guys are scaring me.  There has to be a better way, doesn't there? --[[User:Adaram|Adaram]] 17:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Source_directory_priorities&amp;diff=7611</id>
		<title>Source directory priorities</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.datoolset.net/mw/index.php?title=Source_directory_priorities&amp;diff=7611"/>
				<updated>2009-11-12T20:07:51Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Adaram: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The Dragon Age toolset exports resources to a set of directories that varies depending on the module's settings, and the game reads these resources from various directories with a certain order of priority. Resources with the same name can override each other by being placed in directories with greater priority, and may or may not be loaded depending on which module the game is currently playing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This list is the order from top priority to bottom:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\packages\core\override&lt;br /&gt;
*Program Files\Dragon Age\packages\core\override&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\override&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\patch&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\locale&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\textures&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\audio\VO&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\audio\Sound&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\env&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents\BioWare\Dragon Age\AddIns\&amp;lt;module UID&amp;gt;\core\data&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Note:''' There is currently a bug in the game preventing it from reading resources in the &amp;quot;My Documents Module&amp;quot; locations.  This is a bug which has been WNF'ed for initial release. The toolset does read from here, however, so there is some possibility for confusion if you're working on resources that are located here. Until the patch correcting this comes out, users are advised to [[creating a module|create modules]] as &amp;quot;addin&amp;quot; type even when they're stand-alone.&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Override&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Patch&lt;br /&gt;
*My Doucments Module Locale&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Data&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Toolset&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Patch&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Local&lt;br /&gt;
*My Documents Module Data&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Override&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Textures\Patch_&amp;lt;Med/High&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Patch&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Locale&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Data&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Toolset&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Audio\VO&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Audio\Sound&lt;br /&gt;
*Module Root&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Program Files\Dragon Age\packages\core\Patch&lt;br /&gt;
*Core Locale&lt;br /&gt;
*Core Env&lt;br /&gt;
*Core Textures\&amp;lt;Med/High&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*Core Data&lt;br /&gt;
*Core Audio\VO&lt;br /&gt;
*ENV_LAYOUT??? - Doesn't seem to be used&lt;br /&gt;
*ENV_CHUNK??? - Uses for env rims somehow&lt;br /&gt;
*Core Audio\Sound&lt;br /&gt;
*RESMETRICS??? - Doesn't seem to be used&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Note:''' end-users will not be able to create functioning offers, this is a feature used by official BioWare-produced post-release content.&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Textures\Patch_&amp;lt;Med/High&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Override&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Patch&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Locale&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Audio\VO&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Audio\Sound&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Env&lt;br /&gt;
*Offer Data&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Overriding base campaign resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Currently resources with the same name and type as an existing resource in another module can't be&lt;br /&gt;
created in the same database as that module. Since the database that comes with the toolset has a set of core resources and the base campaign already in it, this makes overriding base campaign resources tricky.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One possible approach to overriding a core resource would be to open a local copy (not checked out), make your edits to it, then export it.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Another possible approach could be to create a new resource with a similar name, and then after exporting it (but before doing a builder to player packaging) go into the toolset export directory where it's been exported and renaming it to match the resource you wish to override.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These approaches have not yet been tested and may or may not work. Experiments remain to be done.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Overriding engine resources ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Note that it is possible to override resources that are used by the game engine. For example, the &amp;quot;fade&amp;quot; framebuffer effect uses the material object &amp;quot;fade.mao&amp;quot;; if you were to create your own material object with this name and put it in override the game would use that instead. This can cause unexpected effects and should be done with care.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Adaram</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>