![]() |
| >>> Click
here to download Final Fantasy Ringtones |
| Administrator |
#73 *removes the completely unnecessary bold and underline tags* Okay. Not as huge as the difference between VI and VII, though. And you do realise that FFXIX won't be released for about 5-10 years, right? We can deal with that problem when the need arises. It's really messy. Yes. The staff category actually contains a lot more than three forums. The reference category is completely different to the other categories, too, because the stuff there simply doesn't fit into any other category. The split of the Square category, if it goes ahead, wouldn't be to tidy up the forums while keeping the category system as simple as possible at the same time. The future doesn't matter because the future isn't the present. The present is our priority. The future will matter in however many years down the line. I mean, you don't see us creating the FFXIII forum just now, do you? There's a good reason for that. It's not the future yet. When the time comes, we will create that forum. Until the time comes, there is no need for it. When the time comes, we may further split the categories. Until the time comes, there is no need for it. This isn't a "look to the future" thing. This is a "Tidy up the forums" thing. Reorganising isn't exactly something we're entirely limited to and we can simply adjust whenever we see the need to do so. It's not hard, man. Don't freak out that we might have to readjust in a year or in five years or whatever - we can handle that. We'll keep deaths at a minimum. Either way, it'll be a long time before we see any huge need to change the proposed three-category system. It's taken, at a guess, 11-12 new forums before we even considered splitting the Square category (ie, now). That's six years, man. Six years. That's a long time. Also, as I said, it doesn't matter if we reorganise the forums every year, so long as it's best layout given the forums that are actually there. I don't mean to be a jerk or to appear difficult either, but I totally disagree. With such things that can be changed in seconds, like this, and that do not cause a single problem outside aesthetics, there is no drama when it comes to "planning for the future" because we can simply deal with the future problems when they come up, but they won't be problems for some time so... well... there's no problem. ![]() You really should avoid using bold underline all up and down your post like that, btw. It doesn't look good at all, especially from someone with a journalism background of some sort. It makes it difficult to read. Regardless, we're discussing all of this in Staff now so I'm sure you guys will see the end result when we get there. |
| | |
| |
| Banned |
Actually, it's more common than you might think, but it's more involved within scholarly essays in the emphasis of the overall points since most of what they say is drivel, which I won't lie, a lot of what I say tends to be drivel ![]() |
| | |