+dogbreathcanada Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 The "Odd-Shaped Buildings" category and the "Octagon Buildings" categories should be combined. Do we really need both of them? Otherwise we're just going to have a huge flood of categories to the point where the site becomes nearly useless. There's an octagon building listed under "Odd-Shaped" and the building listed under "Octagon" should be under "Odd-Shaped" as well. This just becomes confusing. What if "Octagon" has lower popularity than "Odd-Shaped"? Or vice-versa? Buildings that apply to both (but aren't in both categories) are lost to people depending on how high they have their popularity filter set. (The popularity filter is another pet peeve of mine, and, unless set to 100% is nearly useless, since it's not really filtering my personal preferences, it's simply a random filter in essence. I'll save this for another thread.) Link to comment
+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Wouldnt Octagonal fall as a subcategory in Unusual shaped buildings? Ive started using the favorites link to keep tabs on the categories I care about. I do not know its limits however. Link to comment
+dogbreathcanada Posted August 23, 2005 Author Share Posted August 23, 2005 Wouldnt Octagonal fall as a subcategory in Unusual shaped buildings? That's certainly another good option, and maybe the preferable option. Moving "Octagonal Buildings" in the directory tree so that it's a child of "Odd-Shaped Buildings". Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Actually, an octagon has 8 sides so it's even, not odd Link to comment
+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Picky picky picky Link to comment
+FtMgAl Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 (edited) Shouldn't that be picky, picky, picky, picky, picky, picky, picky, picky? I tend to side with more subcategories of subcategories rather than finding the right combination of single level categories to dump everything into or dumping waymarks into categories they don't really fit. If you are looking for something specific it shouldn't be that hard to drill down a few more levels to find it. If you are looking for something generic that fits the larger category, aren't you looking for something in a specific geographic area which means you don't care how it is categorized because you will be looking at a map? Edited August 23, 2005 by FtMgAl Link to comment
+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 (edited) Shouldn't that be picky, picky, picky, picky, picky, picky, picky, picky? I was too lazy to type more I tend to side with more subcategories of subcategories rather than finding the right combination of single level categories to dump everything into or dumping waymarks into categories they don't really fit. If you are looking for something specific it shouldn't be that hard to drill down a few more levels to find it. If you are looking for something generic that fits the larger category, aren't you looking for something in a specific geographic area which means you don't care how it is categorized because you will be looking at a map? Agreed. Going from general to more specific is almost second nature to me. Edited August 24, 2005 by Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking Link to comment
Recommended Posts