Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Too much socialite Options · View
gav
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 1:16:20 AM

Rank: Code Monkey
Moderator

Joined: 12/25/2006
Posts: 1,319
Location: Syd, Australia
Another performance tweak I'm working on is capping the number of friends you can add. At the moments its unlimited, which can open up a world of pain trying to aggregate your activity feeds. All the cool sites are doing it, FB and Twitter have limits (although they have got better at it).

So I'm thinking of 200 is a good number, this will impact ~800 of you extreme socialites.

munky2





overmykneenow
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:20:27 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/8/2010
Posts: 1,298
Location: United Kingdom
While 800 might not sound a lot compared to 200,000 users, that would be a lot of your most regular users. I can see how this might make a few people jittery.

70% of people with the socialite badge were active in the last month - that's a massive retention factor. It compares to just under 10% of all users being active in the last month

Instead of capping the number of friends why not limit access to the activity feed to those with less than 200 friends. The more friends you have the more meaningless it becomes any way.

Alternatively, reduce the activity feed to one month or maybe make the ability to have +100 friends purely a perk for Gold members.

Warning: The opinions above are those of an anonymous individual on the internet. They are opinions, unless they're facts. They may be ill-informed, out of touch with reality or just plain stupid. They may contain traces of irony. If reading these opinions causes you to be become outraged or you start displaying the symptoms of outrage, stop reading them immediately. If symptoms persist, consult a psychiatrist.

Why not read some stories instead

NEW! Want a quick read for your coffee break? Why not try this... Flash Erotica: Scrubber
kiera
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:36:57 AM

Rank: Short Arse Brit

Joined: 3/23/2013
Posts: 14,967
Location: Sipping tea , United Kingdom
Hey babes Big Hugs

Not sure it will work tbh. I don't have the socialite badge im careful who I accept as friends and only do so after interacting with them in the forums or email. Many people here don't tho and that's fine, I dub them friend collectors lol.

That being said though, I wouldn't like to be restricted to who I can and can't accept as a friend, by way of example, I don't think I accepted any last month, but so far this month I have made 4-5 new ones, I wouldn't like to have to turn anyone I find interesting down should they ask to be friends as I had already hit my quota for the month. Obviously the longer you are here the more friends you will make, I personally don't want to be restricted but that's just my opinion, for what its worth.
nicola
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 5:05:17 AM

Rank: Matriarch
Moderator

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 26,777
Location: United Kingdom
I'd rather see the activity feed restricted, rather than the friend #'s.

It doesn't make logical sense to me on a social network, whether it's Facebook, Twitter or here, to restrict your friend numbers, that's what networking is all about (provided of course, the servers / setup is up to it, and there's not a huge amount of scope for user abuse / friend spamming).

If it's mainly the activity feed issue, then maybe limit it to the last say, 50 friend most recent friend entries? I don't know about you, but the last time I went on Facebook, I scrolled down the page a few times, and that was enough for me. I must have seen posts by around a dozen or two people at the most.
Shylass
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 5:44:26 AM

Rank: Gingerbread Lover

Joined: 1/6/2012
Posts: 3,711
Location: Trumpton, United Kingdom
I have just over 200 "friends" on my list. I don't know most of them, and I barely talk to even my closest friends. I don't even know why most of them wanted to add me anyway (apart from the mod collectors and friend collectors who stick out like a sore thumb, and I ignore or delete them).

I tried to downsize recently, but I was unsure who to get rid of. I wouldn't want to offend anybody who actually wanted to keep me (whoever they are). I thought about just deleting everybody and seeing if anybody noticed (that would make my list nice and small). sunny

However, I do have friends who have more "friends" than I do, and are somehow in contact with most of them. It seems unfair to me to limit the social butterflies because of how active everybody is.

I don't know how it technically works, but I think it would be better to limit the activity feed somehow. I don't like the idea of limiting it to latest friends, though, as it is (mostly) my oldest friends that I stalk... evil5



Ut incepit fidelis, sic permanet.

***
********************************CLICK THE BANNERS TO BUY THESE WILLY-STIFFENING BOOKS!********************************
Jinxy
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:47:23 AM

Rank: Princess Blondie

Joined: 10/10/2012
Posts: 3,112
Location: In His Heart, United States
I have only bout 30 friends, but I'd not wanna be restricted to who I added if I happen to add more people. This is a social site, isn't it? That's part of havin friends, even some as many as 1000 or some with just 30.

†Jinxy Approved†

sprite
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 7:33:52 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 17,942
Location: My Tower, United States
gav wrote:
Another performance tweak I'm working on is capping the number of friends you can add. At the moments its unlimited, which can open up a world of pain trying to aggregate your activity feeds. All the cool sites are doing it, FB and Twitter have limits (although they have got better at it).

So I'm thinking of 200 is a good number, this will impact ~800 of you extreme socialites.

munky2







dude... you're killing me here. you've seen my friends list right? as for activity feed, i actually monitor mine so i can keep my finger on the pulse of what needs to happen here. sounds silly, i know, but i actually have a good idea of what's going on here, even with people i only interact with once in a blue moon, and it sort of helps me do "my job" as well as makes me available to authors, should they have questions, comments, etc. just my two cents, but yeah, not liking the proposed changes.

Live, love, laugh.
underthehood
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 7:41:28 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 5/7/2011
Posts: 891
Location: somewhere in dreams
Capping the friend limit wouldn't do it as said above. It is a social site after all and some of the more popular writers would always get the attention from the followers whom you cannot always turn down.

Activity feed can be restricted like it has been down with the private messages to a few days only. Right now my page shows activity feeds of 33 pages. Clipping off even 10 pages from every profile and bringing it down to 20 ? I have never even gone back more than 2-3 pages at once on the activities.

Also there are some members who are constantly active and posting comments in numerous profiles every day. Appreciate their efforts in being social but guess not everybody needs every single notification about those comments. Maybe an option to block activity feeds from such members while allowing the similar feeds from others ?

And from personal experience (not sure if it is applicable to everyone else), when you're new on the site you want to look/be more active and achieve milestones. Badges are one of them and Socialite badge is an easy one. It is rather insignificant and members (atleast I did in my previous profile) keep adding friends till they get the badge. So either discard the Socialite badge or bring the number of friends needed down from 100 ?

Small changes but multiplied by number of profiles they may help confused5
Coco
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 7:44:43 AM

Rank: Lady of Mystery
Moderator

Joined: 7/22/2011
Posts: 5,085
Location: Fantasy City, United States
Either restriction doesn't bother me. I have too many friends and I often delete people from the list. I'd like to interact with everyone on the list but time and general disinterest doesn't allow me to. If the activity feed was limited I wouldn't miss anything as I normally use mine just to see if my friends have posted stories.

Edited: That sounds really bad. It isn't that I'm not interested in people, it's that what most people want to talk about, I might not interested in. Some folks are just too damn horny lmao...




adagio_sabadicus
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 8:05:58 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/24/2013
Posts: 1,495
I much prefer myself as social-lite. I'm not much into friend squeezer pleaser. To many baskets lets the pests annoy
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 8:15:24 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,826
Location: Your dirty fantasy
God, I don't even know how many people are on my friend list but I'm sure it's well over the 200 allotment. Personally I would rather shut off or limit my activity feed than start the mess of deleting people. I don't even look at my activity feed as it is.

Mazza
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 8:55:12 AM

Rank: Mazztastic

Joined: 9/20/2012
Posts: 3,295
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
I have a reasonably large friend list. A lot of those have added me because of stories and so forth and I'd be reluctant to delete people even though I might not interact with them so often...

A reduced activity feed would suit me. I really only want to see people's story comments (I'll quite often go on and read what they've read), and forum posts too, I'll quite often check to see what my friends are up to in there.

I mostly check out my "what you've missed" page, that's my favourite just now.

I'd suggest that maybe you would limit the choice to only some of the filters to show on your profile page? Personally I'm not that interested on which pictures or profiles people have commented on and I would happily omit those from my feed. Maybe gold members could select a couple more, as a benefit of the subscription?

I've already got images and videos turned off in my feed and I usually only click to see which forum posts, new stories and story comments have been made...


Nothing to see here...
overmykneenow
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 9:33:29 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/8/2010
Posts: 1,298
Location: United Kingdom
Mazza wrote:
I mostly check out my "what you've missed" page, that's my favourite just now.


I'd imagine that's exactly where gav's problems are coming from hence why it was down for about a week.

Iterating though hundreds of non-indexed select queries chews up server time. Maybe it would help if there was a way of "hibernating" inactive accounts so that activity lists only bother checking active accounts.

I'd also imagine the forum replies facility on the timeline slows things down more than anything else



Warning: The opinions above are those of an anonymous individual on the internet. They are opinions, unless they're facts. They may be ill-informed, out of touch with reality or just plain stupid. They may contain traces of irony. If reading these opinions causes you to be become outraged or you start displaying the symptoms of outrage, stop reading them immediately. If symptoms persist, consult a psychiatrist.

Why not read some stories instead

NEW! Want a quick read for your coffee break? Why not try this... Flash Erotica: Scrubber
kiera
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 10:20:23 AM

Rank: Short Arse Brit

Joined: 3/23/2013
Posts: 14,967
Location: Sipping tea , United Kingdom
Mazza wrote:
I have a reasonably large friend list. A lot of those have added me because of stories and so forth and I'd be reluctant to delete people even though I might not interact with them so often...

A reduced activity feed would suit me. I really only want to see people's story comments (I'll quite often go on and read what they've read), and forum posts too, I'll quite often check to see what my friends are up to in there.

I mostly check out my "what you've missed" page, that's my favourite just now.

I'd suggest that maybe you would limit the choice to only some of the filters to show on your profile page? Personally I'm not that interested on which pictures or profiles people have commented on and I would happily omit those from my feed. Maybe gold members could select a couple more, as a benefit of the subscription?

I've already got images and videos turned off in my feed and I usually only click to see which forum posts, new stories and story comments have been made...


Well said Maz, yeah you are right I don't need to see who is posting which pics ect and to whom, its annoying and takes up half my page, I personally have mine turned off aswell, for my friends benefit as I know how annoying it can be.

Id deal with that issue Gav, Like Maz I only really need to see which forums my friends are posting in as I enjoy reading their posts and if they are reading a story that may interest me. Restricting who you can be friends with in my view doesn't equal social network...just sayin xo
Mazza
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 10:28:46 AM

Rank: Mazztastic

Joined: 9/20/2012
Posts: 3,295
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
I'll come back later and update this

Nothing to see here...
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 11:50:39 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,826
Location: Your dirty fantasy
Ok - I just counted out of curiosity. I have 875 friends. confused1

A friend-cap would just be cruel. crybaby

lafayettemister
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 12:01:31 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,469
Location: Alabama, United States
gav wrote:
Another performance tweak I'm working on is capping the number of friends you can add. At the moments its unlimited, which can open up a world of pain trying to aggregate your activity feeds. All the cool sites are doing it, FB and Twitter have limits (although they have got better at it).

So I'm thinking of 200 is a good number, this will impact ~800 of you extreme socialites.

munky2







Could this what's causing me to get a "general error" whenever I try to go to my profile page?





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Poppet
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:04:53 PM

Rank: Sweetest Cricket

Joined: 10/5/2012
Posts: 6,046
Location: In Your Dirty Fantasies, United States
I have almost 200 friends, and though I don’t interact with them all, all the time. I do try my best to stay in touch with them as often as I can. Some add me for just for the mere matter of liking my stories, others because of the forums or chat rooms, etc.

I'm not that interested on which pictures or profiles people have commented on, and I have a few friends who spam all their friends’ photos and it bogs up my feed. It does irk me. I wouldn't want to delete people because of this; I just think some things should be hidden, such as this so no one sees it. The said person will see it on their time line; it’s no one else’s business if X made a comment on O’s photo but those two people. Nor is it anyone else’s concern if O posts a photo on X’s wall.

I think those two things are the biggest boggers on my news feed. I just don’t think that removing friends or having a restriction is the right way to go. As other stated, this is a social networking site and some might think 200 friends is a lot, whereas some others might not at all. I’ve seen some people will well over 800 even 1000 friends. How do you ask those people to cut down to just 100 or so friends?

Honestly, I’d be fine with just seeing on news feed who has posted a story and their blogs. Everything else is nothing I really care to know about. Sometimes I see someone post in a forum that looks interesting, and I’ll go because of it, whereas some spam the forums and fill the feed, making it annoying. That’s why I have so much of my stuff private, so I don’t bog up others news feed.

That’s just my two cents. My 2 cents Please don’t take our friends away…

gav
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:09:16 PM

Rank: Code Monkey
Moderator

Joined: 12/25/2006
Posts: 1,319
Location: Syd, Australia
Trying to retro fit these kind of limits is always going to be hard *sigh*

Reducing the amount of activity displayed isn’t going to help. In order to show the most recent activity we need to aggregate the activity of ALL friends then slice the top records.

Perhaps 200 was a little optimistic  Maybe a cap that would not affect any of our current users but would at least give an upper bounds and deterministic performance. I think 1000 is reasonable.

I bet there isn’t a social site out there that has unlimited friends. Facebook has 5,000 but they have 180k servers and thousands of programmers angry7



kiera
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:47:03 PM

Rank: Short Arse Brit

Joined: 3/23/2013
Posts: 14,967
Location: Sipping tea , United Kingdom
gav wrote:
Trying to retro fit these kind of limits is always going to be hard *sigh*

Reducing the amount of activity displayed isn’t going to help. In order to show the most recent activity we need to aggregate the activity of ALL friends then slice the top records.

Perhaps 200 was a little optimistic  Maybe a cap that would not affect any of our current users but would at least give an upper bounds and deterministic performance. I think 1000 is reasonable.

I bet there isn’t a social site out there that has unlimited friends. Facebook has 5,000 but they have 180k servers and thousands of programmers angry7





Seriously mate u have the weirdest avatar I have EVER seen dontknow Its awesome pmsl xo

1000 seems fair to me, doubt ill ever even make 100 tbh. You know what tho forget whatever I have posted prior to this, Gav you do whatever u need to do babes to stop Lush crashing. It just crashed for ages and I was so bored pmsl ....new friends can be overated Whistle
Poppet
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:47:23 PM

Rank: Sweetest Cricket

Joined: 10/5/2012
Posts: 6,046
Location: In Your Dirty Fantasies, United States
I don't know all the ins and outs of what you have to do to make it work, but I know 200 friends is a major blow to a lot of people. Especially mods and authors. Maybe 1000 might be best, though I do know some who have that many. I just barely keep up with my 160.

gav wrote:
Reducing the amount of activity displayed isn’t going to help.
Can we still have an option to hide this? It is rather annoying. Not to get off the subject at hand.

Liz
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:50:39 PM

Rank: Scarlet Seductress
Moderator

Joined: 1/22/2013
Posts: 6,243
Location: In the sweet shop, United Kingdom
gav wrote:
Trying to retro fit these kind of limits is always going to be hard *sigh*

Reducing the amount of activity displayed isn’t going to help. In order to show the most recent activity we need to aggregate the activity of ALL friends then slice the top records.

Perhaps 200 was a little optimistic  Maybe a cap that would not affect any of our current users but would at least give an upper bounds and deterministic performance. I think 1000 is reasonable.

I bet there isn’t a social site out there that has unlimited friends. Facebook has 5,000 but they have 180k servers and thousands of programmers angry7


I know someone with over 1,000 - she's a feisty one kekekegay

"Carefully written, fact-checked essay in the streets, unmoderated comments section in the sheets."

LadyX
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 4:21:58 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,804
Is there a better Electronic Pop band name than "Too Much Socialite"? I think not.
Guest
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:37:42 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 700,331
I've often wanted to turn off particular notifications on my activity feed, like we can for ourselves so they don't show on our friends feeds. I don't ever go back to look at the parts of the feed I've missed, but like the fact it's there when I'm online. That option would save me from having to look at "Mr X made a comment on......" 200 times in a row.

Would this help?
sprite
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:46:58 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 17,942
Location: My Tower, United States
gav wrote:
Trying to retro fit these kind of limits is always going to be hard *sigh*

Reducing the amount of activity displayed isn’t going to help. In order to show the most recent activity we need to aggregate the activity of ALL friends then slice the top records.

Perhaps 200 was a little optimistic  Maybe a cap that would not affect any of our current users but would at least give an upper bounds and deterministic performance. I think 1000 is reasonable.

I bet there isn’t a social site out there that has unlimited friends. Facebook has 5,000 but they have 180k servers and thousands of programmers angry7





umm... lol - i DO feel for you Gav, but yeah, seriously, i passed teh 1000 mark a long time ago. i'd be happy to weed it down to that, but still, you're killing me here! :) would it help if i sent you more photos? i have some of me with a light saber. that's it, just me and a light saber. and a smile. :)

Live, love, laugh.
sprite
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:48:05 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 17,942
Location: My Tower, United States
Liz wrote:


I know someone with over 1,000 - she's a feisty one kekekegay


*mumbles about sassy english bus dodging lesbians and goes back to being anti-social*

Live, love, laugh.
TxPrincess
Posted: Monday, September 16, 2013 7:59:03 PM

Rank: The Resident Princess

Joined: 10/6/2012
Posts: 325
Location: The Best Part, United States
Maybe throw the story commented and scored in its own tab...so that if you want to see you get to...or make it say blank scored/commented on blah story. I can see where a cap is bad, but for the average user (not a mod, maybe even gold members) you can let them have say 500 for regulars and like more for gold and then unlimited for mods. just my 2 cents

sassycheergirl
Posted: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:44:45 PM

Rank: Lollipop Girl

Joined: 11/7/2009
Posts: 1,508
Location: a corn field , United States
I think it maybe easier to just be able to have users hide activity so that way that person doesnt have to see it. Would that work at all?


*smiles, hugs, and lollipops*



Sassy
Shylass
Posted: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 12:38:02 AM

Rank: Gingerbread Lover

Joined: 1/6/2012
Posts: 3,711
Location: Trumpton, United Kingdom
sassycheergirl wrote:
I think it maybe easier to just be able to have users hide activity so that way that person doesnt have to see it. Would that work at all?


Congratulations on your 1,500th post! occasion7

Do you mean each individual user could hide the activity log completely? Or certain aspects of it? I like seeing some activity, but not all the photo comments on another user's photos. I'm only really interested in seeing who is around when I log in, and my Timeline.

Or did you mean that we all help Gav by choosing that setting by default because it's easier? I'll do it for a gingerbread cookie (not because I wouldn't do it for Gav, but I just want a cookie)!



Ut incepit fidelis, sic permanet.

***
********************************CLICK THE BANNERS TO BUY THESE WILLY-STIFFENING BOOKS!********************************
nicola
Posted: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 1:23:04 AM

Rank: Matriarch
Moderator

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 26,777
Location: United Kingdom
Does it help restricting it based on a specific time period, ie, the last 7 days for example?

Or does the server have to do all the crunching, and then lop off the last 7 days only from the entire bunch as you mentioned in a similar scenario?

Maybe one for Mr Mongo himself?

Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.