I'll try to keep this to the point. It seems that the new site is missing a plethora of old coveted features, too many to list, and seemingly too many to justify removing them completely. My apologies if this has been posted already (I'm not terribly good at finding things yet), but it really feels like these features were removed to better test the new site features in a more isolated environment, and could return as enough testing has been done on the new features. Is this a safe assumption? [u][b]Update:[/b][/u] Old Papa Rich convinced me to give as much feedback to the Web Team as I possibly could, so here's my criticism with love! [b]Forum(s) & Tags:[/b] For starters, I absolutely love the tagging system, but I don't feel that tags are an adequate substitute to the old Sub-Forums, at least not yet. I like the idea of essentially creating your own forums with tags, however navigating just feels too unstructured and fluid as it stands. I know one could argue that proper tag searching would effectively recreate the bounds of the old Sub-Forums, but that's assuming every thread creator is properly tagging and every reader knows how to search for the right combination of tags. I think that is an unrealistic goal of the Web Team, especially considering how many new and oblivious users are on their way for Destiny. I recall that one of the goals of providing such filters was to allow users to effectively find the topics they hold interest for and want to participate in, but as I toy with the tag filters looking for what I want to discuss, I am put off of discussion by the amount of work it takes to start seeing what I want to see. Looking around, it seems that I am not the only one with this opinion, and I think I know why that is. The old Sub-Forums provided an inherent universal definition as to what was classified as a "community topic" or an "off-topic thread", and violators would either have their thread locked or moved to maintain those basic topic definitions. The new system offers no unified topic definitions among users, as it is all completely subjective without much guidance. Who's to say that a user can't load their thread up with six of the most commonly used tags just to garnish more attention? Before anyone claims that this is by design and that it's beneficial since it broadens the audience, well yes, you're right, but think of the cost. Overly tagged threads dilute every tag search that the thread is not actually relevant to, reducing the filter's effectiveness for finding new content. How does that help users find exactly what they want to talk about? It doesn't, which is why I think some limitations should be put into place on tagging. If bringing back the old Sub-Forums is not ideal for the Web Team, then one direction that I would explore is the use of Major Tags and Minor Tags. Major Tags would ideally be things like "Community, Off-Topic, Halo, Destiny" and so on, covering a range of familiar broad topics, which a thread creator would have to choose one or two from a preset list to be placed at submission. Minor Tags, on the other hand, would be a lot more specific in nature and wouldn't have limitations other than not being able to mimic any of the unused Major Tags. Obviously, I doubt it could be this simple, but at least something like this would hinder the amount of search dilution a user could do with a single thread, protecting tag search effectiveness. I also think that it should be more apparent that you can search for multiple tags at once, as noted by CAVX. One other idea I had, to improve thread searching, is to automatically place the author and every word in the thread title as soft tags. Soft meaning that they don't count towards the six allowed tags and can't be seen or followed by other users. I think this would greatly improve thread search results. I have already encountered the problem of not being able to find a previous thread I looked at simply because the author of the thread didn't apply the same tags that I would have if I had made the thread. Remembering the title, or even just a few key words, and author of the thread would instantly yield perfect search parameters if I wanted to re-find that thread. If "Likes" are going to be the new determinant for thread listing, then I would also suggest the "Liking" of individual tags rather than the whole OP, similar to how Halo file tagging worked. Reinforcing individual tags would lead to better search results in my opinion, since as it stands now "Liking" the OP seems to just reinforce every tag all at once, giving no information about which tags are more relevant. The same would apply to "Disliking". [u][b]Threads:[/b][/u] My biggest gripe about the thread layout is how it is essentially an ineffective emulation of Reddit, and I say that with love considering how much time I waste on both sites. This comment style compliments Reddit because of the separation of content and discussion, and doesn't compliment Bungie.net for the same reason. Chronological comment listing is irrelevant on Reddit because the OP's goal isn't to directly participate in the conversation the majority of the time, but more accurately just there to provide a starter topic for multiple grouped discussions. On Bungie.net, traditionally, the OP's goal has most certainly been to heavily participate in a linear discussion, and I don't see that habit changing any time soon. Chronological comment listing is extremely important to Bnet's forum structure, in my opinion, because of this. I have much less of a desire to go to previously visited threads because I know that it's going to be extremely confusing and hard to follow the discussion I missed out on. I'm alright with the clumping of sub-discussions within threads, as it makes sense to me to distinguish users replying to the OP from those who are replying to other users. What I don't like is how the latter is hidden from view by default. Everyone wants their voice to be heard, and let's face it, we're all lazy when it comes to listening to other voices. Why initially hide potentially good opinions and discussions just because it's not in direct response to the OP? I think that this would eventually just influence users to only reply to the OP as they find out that other users have to work harder to see their posts otherwise. [b][u]Posts:[/b][/u] I really have no problem with individual post layout or the post creation tool. All the texts fields are clearly labeled, the shared link field is a very nice feature, the "Start Related Topic" feature is really interesting, and text markups are more intuitive than ever before. Seriously, the Web Team did a great job here. If I had to change one thing though, I would make it a little bit more apparent that the "Hide" feature is one's "report and move on" tool all rolled into one button. Perhaps that will be understood in time anyways. A preview button would be much appreciated as well. [b][u]Private Groups:[/b][/u] Wow, this is what I was primarily referring to in my first paragraph. Groups got the most features taken away then probably any other thing on here, for seemingly little reason, and I was under the impression that the opposite was going to be true. I am really hoping that these features, that have been proven to work well, were just removed to better test the new features that aren't so solid yet. Here's a list of the missing group features that I greatly valued: - Varied Administrator, Moderator, and Member roles (not just titles, but abilities) - Alphabetical member listing - Ability to ban straight from the post - Ability for Admin/Moderators to edit other posts and lock threads (Ending the discussion without Hiding or Deleting) - Group History Log - Pinned threads (Announcements on the homepage are good substitute, in my opinion) (I will continue to add more as I remember things) Like I stated earlier, I am really hoping that these features are just "hidden" from our view and will come back once the Web Team is done testing out the new features. I also think it is a bit strange to have bans transfer over from public discussions, though I don't have a strong argument against it, it's just a very different concept that I'm not sure I like. Staying positive, I think the new tagging system will do wonders for groups, and I am extremely happy to have it. Here's a list of some new features I would love to see added to groups: - Ability for Admin/Moderators to merge threads together - Official group tags for public group discussions automatically added to those threads - A plethora of group options when Bungie Pro launches again (Group Fileshares, etc.) (I will continue to add as I think of things) [u][b]User Profiles:[/b][/u] Like groups, I feel like a lot was taken away from profiles. It would really surprise and disappoint me if some of the old profile features didn't return after this Beta phase. Here's a list of the missing profile features that I greatly valued: - Thread saving - Full post History [u][b]STILL IN PROGRESS[/b][/u]