Petition, bring back the old site.

Max Q · Mon Jul 04, 2016 11:43 pm

It's pretty clear this new site is a disaster, why it was changed is beyond me , the intention was good i'm sure but its just not working.

How about listening to the members and bring back the old site we all enjoyed.

evanm · Mon Jul 04, 2016 11:48 pm

Is this april fools? There's nothing redeeming about the old site. This new effort was more than a decade overdue, and there's not a single reason to revert it.

Tue Jul 05, 2016 8:47 am

It doesn't matter if you start a petition, the old site will not and can't be brought back

Airshipcenter · Tue Jul 05, 2016 10:14 am

I don't believe so either. Many new members will come in the years from now and these will never know the old site, and the majority will adapt. In the end, it's a product, and if it's not to one's desire I would stop using it or search an alternative, and if it be so that this happens in huge scale then those in the higher positions will have to improve the site so it'll survive, and if they don't, it means this new layout works.

Revelation · Wed Jul 06, 2016 12:25 am

Airshipcenter wrote:
I don't believe so either. Many new members will come in the years from now and these will never know the old site, and the majority will adapt. In the end, it's a product, and if it's not to one's desire I would stop using it or search an alternative, and if it be so that this happens in huge scale then those in the higher positions will have to improve the site so it'll survive, and if they don't, it means this new layout works.

You have a lot more faith in those in 'higher positions' than I do.

They can't seem to implement simple color changes in over three weeks time.

You seem to have a lot of faith that new audiences can be created from thin air.

Someone gave the example of digg.com ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digg ) a while ago.

It makes for sad reading.

SpaceDiva · Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:29 am

I can't agree more. The new design is terrible and most people here agree and it looks the same so it's pretty obvious to me that the person who did this lacks the competence to fix it, or they are just very arrogant and think their bad site design is golden and all us "dumb members will get over it and stop complaining" and this seems to be the general vibe I get.
Worse yet, my computer is down right now and trying to use the site on a tablet or phone is impossible so my friend has to type this reply for me because the site is so unreadable. I have gotten a few responses from the Crew here but I can tell that any concern for those with vision problems is not a high priority. I hope they bring back the old format, the site is literally unusable for me on anything but a computer screen with special adjustments that no other site I use needs. Not only are the colors and font style hard to read, it is hard to find photos. The nicest way I can say it is, whoever redesigned this site sadly lacks the training to do web design. The crew also lacks professionalism in the way they have responded to the backlash. I am not impressed. At this point if they want to save the site from totally going under, they should issue a huge apology to whatever members are left and hire someone to make a site that looks like a site from the year 2016 and not a site that looks like it was made in 1999. The point of an upgrade is generally to make a site better looking, easier to use and more convenient for everyone. The redesign failed on all these points. I also notice no single member of the Crew has taken any personal responsibility for members being unhappy probably because that person lacks the courage to admit they are completely embarrassed and probably do not want their name associated with this job. I wouldn't either but if my design was getting scathing remarks like this, I would fix it in a timely manner and have the respect to at least issue an apology, leave the thread OPEN for comments instead of locking it and give members an estimated date that things would be fixed. So please add my name to the petition to restore the site back to how it used to look. Nobody can properly read this ugly new layout and the fact people still care enough to use this crummy format to complain shows that people still care. It is too bad. This site was great before. Now it totally sucks and seems to be dying off fast. Too bad...I hope.they fix it before it's too late!

airkas1 · Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:46 am

SpaceDiva wrote:
I can't agree more. The new design is terrible and most people here agree and it looks the same so it's pretty obvious to me that the person who did this lacks the competence to fix it, or they are just very arrogant and think their bad site design is golden and all us "dumb members will get over it and stop complaining" and this seems to be the general vibe I get.
Worse yet, my computer is down right now and trying to use the site on a tablet or phone is impossible so my friend has to type this reply for me because the site is so unreadable. I have gotten a few responses from the Crew here but I can tell that any concern for those with vision problems is not a high priority. I hope they bring back the old format, the site is literally unusable for me on anything but a computer screen with special adjustments that no other site I use needs. Not only are the colors and font style hard to read, it is hard to find photos. The nicest way I can say it is, whoever redesigned this site sadly lacks the training to do web design. The crew also lacks professionalism in the way they have responded to the backlash. I am not impressed. At this point if they want to save the site from totally going under, they should issue a huge apology to whatever members are left and hire someone to make a site that looks like a site from the year 2016 and not a site that looks like it was made in 1999. The point of an upgrade is generally to make a site better looking, easier to use and more convenient for everyone. The redesign failed on all these points. I also notice no single member of the Crew has taken any personal responsibility for members being unhappy probably because that person lacks the courage to admit they are completely embarrassed and probably do not want their name associated with this job. I wouldn't either but if my design was getting scathing remarks like this, I would fix it in a timely manner and have the respect to at least issue an apology, leave the thread OPEN for comments instead of locking it and give members an estimated date that things would be fixed. So please add my name to the petition to restore the site back to how it used to look. Nobody can properly read this ugly new layout and the fact people still care enough to use this crummy format to complain shows that people still care. It is too bad. This site was great before. Now it totally sucks and seems to be dying off fast. Too bad...I hope.they fix it before it's too late!

You're shitting me, right?

because the site is so unreadable.

Forum is back to the old blue and almost the old fonts etc. and you still think it's unreadable. I can't imagine what you must've gone through with the old forum then.

it is hard to find photos.

Photos --> Search --> Advanced Search. Not that hard.

The crew also lacks professionalism in the way they have responded to the backlash. I am not impressed.

F*ck that! Johnny and I have been working our butts off in trying to provide a listening ear and feedback to >90% of all posts. I would say we have tried to reply in the most professional way and I take offense to your words.

I also notice no single member of the Crew has taken any personal responsibility for members being unhappy probably because that person lacks the courage to admit they are completely embarrassed and probably do not want their name associated with this job.

Again, see the above post. I for one still think that the new site will be very nice when everything has been fixed. So hardly lack of courage. You make wrongful assumptions and it reflects badly on you imho. Again, I take offense to your words.

leave the thread OPEN for comments instead of locking it and give members an estimated date that things would be fixed.

Some threads have been closed to channel feedback into the appropriate thread. Nothing wrong with that. And for updates, you might want to read the Issues FAQ thread every once in a while.

Nobody can properly read this ugly new layout

I and others can read it just fine.

In the end, the old site will not come back (also technically not possible IIRC). Like I said, the new site will be good once all issues are fixed. And last, but certainly not least; the way you hate on the crew. Unfuckingbelievable. We are users first and enthusiasts in the first place (just like you), next to being volunteers who dedicate their free time to make this a better place. As such, I can certainly do without posts like yours! I feel angry now and am trying hard to hold myself back from writing something I'll regret later. Thanks for making me start my morning like this!!

P.S. Regarding readability; maybe in the future, you might want to make a post in which you use the 'enter' key a few times. Would make it a lot easier to read, in stead of running into that wall of text.

NYPECO · Thu Jul 14, 2016 5:30 am

The new forums looks amazing, thanks for the update! Like others in this thread said, there's absolutely no reason to bring back the old site.

Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:32 am

SpaceDiva, I can only agree to what my colleague has said, and you post actually make me wonder if you actually see the blue or not or if your browser for some reason is caching the white theme. Are you referring to the main site or the forum?
And, please use waybackmachine on ANY site and see how they looked in 1999. You have been a member for two whole months, so it can't really be an issue of "how it always has been" either. Trolling?

Cnn 2000
https://web.archive.org/web/20000815052 ... w.cnn.com/

White House
https://web.archive.org/web/19990117000 ... me-nt.html

Kaphias · Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:35 am

JohnKrist wrote:
Cnn 2000
https://web.archive.org/web/20000815052 ... w.cnn.com/

I got a good laugh out of the fact that the headline on that page is "Clinton says Democrats hold keys to bright future". Some things never change. Gladly, this site finally did.

Thanks John and Kas for all you both are doing, don't let the trolls get to you. 8-)

SpaceDiva · Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:46 am

Fyi....I.memtioned in my post that my computer is down. I am using a tablet to post my reply. It looks better but is still hard to read.for me. Even if it is somewhat more readable, the reply window is still hard to see. I also am still having trouble searching for pictures. Especially many of the Google images get an error message when clicked on.

To the person who made the snarky remark about me using no paragraphs, the site posts the message when I press "enter" and I was having my niece type a reply because this still is hard to read and to navigate on a tablet screen or phone. So thank you for making me feel even worse about my computer being down and the fact I have a disability. If you see my other posts, they all have paragraphs. It isn't my fault this is not working well on a tablet. Maybe when I get my computer back and can SEE what I am typing, I will be able to use the site again. But after being called names and basically treated like crap for something that is not my fault, does not make me want to stick around. It looks like live chat is not coming back and I am not into forums. If anyone would like to chat with me, you can find me on Skype. My username is Space.Diva1

Forgive me if my posts have been somewhat harsh. It is not anything personal, it just sucks when I can't do the things I want online and when sites make changes that impact visibility. The damage is done here and a lot of people are ticked off and have left. If pointing out reality is considered "trolling" than so be it. You are free to share this on Skype, show me your face and tell me what you think of my honesty. Or if you just want to chat about aviation, I would much rather do that...I work and go to school. I do not have time for websites which make annoying changes, then get on my case for pointing out the obvious. So they made it somewhat more readable...it only took how long, a month? And still no chat room? And the photo search is still messed up? I see the colors look better but yeah, it's still not too tablet or phone friendly.
...

Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:13 pm

I use my iPhone and iPad 95% of the time and I do not agree that it's hard to use. It's easier than ever, responsive, zoomable to a size anyone can read. The reply box is black on white, like 99% of everything on the intenet and in print, how can that be hard to read? Zoom will enlarge it as well. The main site will get an overhaul too, and that is up next, something we have stated repeatedly. But when you come in here and insult just about everything and everyone connected to Anet you are not stating anything obvious, you are being rude.
The reason it took a month is that we chose an entirely new theme, and we evaliated different options, then we integrated it into the site and adjusted it to fit the request of our user base. It's not just editing some colour code in css.
You are a designer, if someone rejects your design, can you produce a new one in no time?

airkas1 · Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:07 pm

SpaceDiva wrote:
To the person who made the snarky remark about me using no paragraphs, the site posts the message when I press "enter" and I was having my niece type a reply because this still is hard to read and to navigate on a tablet screen or phone. So thank you for making me feel even worse about my computer being down and the fact I have a disability.

Even on a phone or tablet I'm pretty sure you can make paragraphs, but if you say it's not possible then ok. I'm not going to waste energy arguing that. Although I see you used paragraphs now. Computer fixed? Sorry you felt worse about your disability, but I never said a single word regarding that, nor any part of my post intended like that.

SpaceDiva wrote:
basically treated like crap for something that is not my fault, does not make me want to stick around.

How do you think I felt this morning when I read your post?
You treat me (crew) like crap for something that isn't my fault. Not only is it not my fault, I'm actually one of the very few people trying to actively help making this become the great A.net again. But I guess that's not enough for you. Otherwise you wouldn't have written the below statement.

SpaceDiva wrote:
I also notice no single member of the Crew has taken any personal responsibility for members being unhappy probably because that person lacks the courage to admit they are completely embarrassed and probably do not want their name associated with this job.

You talk trash about the crew, while we're merely trying to help and actually are caught between 2 the community and DM. Do you have any idea of the sh*t we've been dealing with (not only on the forum, but also E-mails) for the last month? I didn't choose for that to happen. I think I actually developed some grey hairs in the process.
Your post insulted everything we (crew) did since the migration and it's very unfair and uncalled for. And THAT is the only beef I had with your post, the rest I can deal with as it is your opinion and you're entitled to it. But don't talk unfair and untrue sh*t about us.

piedmont762 · Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:50 pm

To the thread starter, please get real. It's not happening.

BTW - It's great that the site is back to the blue and I'm finally staying logged in

RCTCU · Sat Jul 16, 2016 1:05 am

The new site is not usable. Searches produce nothing worthwhile. I visited the old one regularly.
I will not visit again and will recommend that to all.

texas80 · Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:49 am

Even on a 30" monitor, the new site is hard to navigate. Maybe if I voice my opinion enough something will get back to the way it used to. Meh

speedbored · Sat Jul 16, 2016 5:41 am

RCTCU wrote:
The new site is not usable. Searches produce nothing worthwhile. I visited the old one regularly.
I will not visit again and will recommend that to all.

texas80 wrote:
Even on a 30" monitor, the new site is hard to navigate. Maybe if I voice my opinion enough something will get back to the way it used to. Meh

Perhaps if people made more constructive criticisms, your suggestions might be used to improve things. Comments like "not usable" or "hard to navigate" help nobody.

At least explain why you think this, and give the developers something they can actually look into, otherwise such comments are just a waste of time.

F9PilotORD · Sat Jul 16, 2016 6:17 am

Just want to say, I won't be back. This is awful. I mean it truly is bad. I may come back in a month to see if changed back to the old format, but if it hasn't, I will be gone for good. This sucks.

kulverstukas · Sat Jul 16, 2016 9:52 am

speedbored wrote:
RCTCU wrote:
The new site is not usable. ...

texas80 wrote:
...Maybe if I voice my opinion enough something will get back to the way it used to. Meh

Perhaps if people made more constructive criticisms, your suggestions might be used to improve things. Comments like "not usable" or "hard to navigate" help nobody.

At least explain why you think this, and give the developers something they can actually look into, otherwise such comments are just a waste of time.

What "constructive" thing can be suggested? Which shade of blue to use? Under hard pressure of negative comments and fast falling traffic developers changed one cheap forum layout to another. In 3 weeks. Major issues, like dead links and lack of A.net bottom banner, which are in "top priority" list are still not fixed - in a month. Main page looks cheap and unprofessional - even junior student of any design college with minimal knowledge of things like usability and color composition can do at least not worse. If we believe our precious informants that "huge crew of developers are working hard to fix bugs and implement features" and we don't see any front end major improvements in a month, we can suggest that this all fresh and new site is already totally broken and lack functionality at back end.

We also have some piece of information to add 2 and 2: "old site will newer be back", DM will hire "content writers" and "DM is the sole owner of this site and has all rights to squeeze some bucks out of it".

speedbored · Sat Jul 16, 2016 11:24 am

kulverstukas wrote:
What "constructive" thing can be suggested?

Like I said, some sort of explanation as to why they think the site is "difficult to navigate", or "unusable" would allow the developers at least to investigate the issue(s).

But just saying it is "unusable", when other people are clearly managing to use it, really doesn't help at all.

kulverstukas · Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:11 pm

speedbored wrote:

But just saying it is "unusable", when other people are clearly managing to use it, really doesn't help at all.

This dogs "are clearly managing to" live this way. So what?

SYDSpotter · Thu Jul 28, 2016 9:31 am

I'd love to know the traffic statistics for the site before and after the forum update.

If you judge the activity purely by the Civil Aviation forum, it appears to have fallen off a cliff.

So you make a site more 'advertiser friendly' to pull in more revenue, only to see your user base desert you in droves... This is what you call an own goal.

Zee77R · Thu Jul 28, 2016 9:36 am

Thank you, very interesting!

kulverstukas · Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:03 am

SYDSpotter wrote:
I'd love to know the traffic statistics for the site before and after the forum update.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/airliners.net

jumbojim747 · Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:29 pm

JohnKrist wrote:
It doesn't matter if you start a petition, the old site will not and can't be brought back

I'm a little late to the party but John with all due respect .
Telling us the old site cant be bought back is hard to handle it sort of takes the wind out of our sales so to speak.
I for one was hoping that it might happen one day if enough was said but you have on several occasions said it wont.
Anyway thanks for your efforts

ezola · Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:41 am

removed

scbriml · Sun Jul 31, 2016 8:03 am

ezola wrote:
YES! Please bring back the old site.

It's been a month. Time to accept that the site is what it is (and slowly improving) and move on. The old site isn't ever coming back.

AvObserver · Sun Jul 31, 2016 12:20 pm

Max Q wrote:
It's pretty clear this new site is a disaster, why it was changed is beyond me , the intention was good i'm sure but its just not working.

How about listening to the members and bring back the old site we all enjoyed.

I agree with the sentiment here; I much prefer the old site too but I don't see the old one coming back-we all just need to adapt to the changes and move on.

ezola · Tue Aug 02, 2016 7:53 pm

removed

bombayduck · Tue Aug 02, 2016 8:42 pm

The old site had it`s bugs just like the new one has. It`s a catch 22 situation. It is a bit like Marmite you either hate or like it.

Adipasquale · Tue Aug 02, 2016 11:53 pm

The old site will never come back. Some of us may have loved it, but you could tell just from looking at it that it was a complete mess behind the scenes. It was essentially a design from the early days of the internet that had been patched for over a decade to remain partially relevant.

I think the thing is that people are resistant to change. Many of us were used to the old a.net layout, which hadn't changed much since the early 2000s. I haven't been here for that long, so I may not be as attached to the old site as some may be, but I don't know how anybody can honestly say the old site was better. The new layout clearly has some things that need to be worked out, but once all the kinks are ironed out, it should be fine.

Anyways, if you enjoy discussing aviation with fellow enthusiasts, the design of the site shouldn't matter that much. It might look different, but the content is still the same. I just don't understand how the design of the site could drive people away.

Lastly, I want to give a shout out to the moderators. I know I gave you a hard time when you said for a year the site update was coming any day, but you guys are volunteers and do it out of love. Also, I will just note that the moderators are not the site developers/programmers and should not be the ones blamed for any perceived shortcomings with the new site. You can relay any information to them, but they are not responsible for writing any of the code for the site.

mh330fc · Wed Aug 03, 2016 5:51 am

If I can petition, I'll be first in line for a simpler, quicker, first class membership add free airliners.net.
Count me in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Adipasquale · Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:10 am

mh330fc wrote:
If I can petition, I'll be first in line for a simpler, quicker, first class membership add free airliners.net.
Count me in!

You can install a free ad block extension on your browser that will not only get rid of the ads on a.net, but across the web. Its free, safe and does not noticeably make pages load slower. I've had adblock plus for years and it works great!

Thu Aug 04, 2016 10:22 pm

mh330fc wrote:
If I can petition, I'll be first in line for a simpler, quicker, first class membership add free airliners.net.
Count me in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It will be back as I have stated several times already

jetblueguy22 · Sun Aug 14, 2016 6:22 am

The site change was a no win situation.

For the 5 years I was a mod we heard it countless times. We were behind the times, it needed to change, the site was always breaking down.

Now we finally got the change and there is nothing but complaints. I'm happy DM put in the effort to make the site new and fresh. Are there things that need some change? Sure. But just as with anything there is a learning curve because it is all new. The nice thing about the change is fixes and new features can be added without the fear that the site is going to implode on itself.

Petition, bring back the old site.

Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Re: Petition, bring back the old site.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net