Is anyone seeing this extra text?

[Uncle]

Hey, can you do me a favour and shoot me a copy of that email to newsletter[at]e-cigarette-forum.com? This should not be the case - newsletters should only ever link to the article and never to a product page.

I would if I could - however I have deleted all those newsletter, especially since there was absolutely no reason for me to keep them . . .

EDIT:
@Oliver . . . BTW: Maybe someone experienced that same as I did with those newsletter/notices and still have one hanging in their mail box that they can send to Ya' . . . Hopefully they will mention it here and forward "You" a copy . . .

 

[Katya]

You know what is kind of humorous, is the fact that yes - I do remember certain words related to vaping we're always highlighted, however they always seem to limk back to what their specific definitions were - especially if they were abbreviations i.e., YMMV, 510's, etc. Not to a products for sale page. Worse now is the ECF newsletter that highlights important stories and events. When you click on the hyperlink it brings you to the ECF store at vaping ....com . . .about what is being sold there - not an article . . .

Before XenForo, we had regular hyperlinks to newspaper articles, other threads, posts, vendor sites, etc. They were nice, useful, discreet and blue. They were instantly and intuitively recognizable as "clickables" but they were not aggressive (red and bold), so they never interrupted or distracted the reader. They were just saying, "Hey, here's more information on the subject" or "Here's a link to the study I'm talking about--click on me if you're interested, if not, just keep on reading." I loved them.

We also had a feature you're describing, sort of a clickable dictionary, for lack of a better term. Loved that feature, too. It was so helpful, especially for newcomers. Dictionary words, acronyms and most commonly used abbreviations were discreetly underlined, and when you hovered your cursor over that underlined term (VG, PG, vaping), a definition popped up (a definition, not a link to anything). Subtle and elegant and informative.

Then came the switch and, for some reason, every clickable (including the dictionary words) became red and bold. Everybody hated that--it was impossible to read people's posts as every simple sentence was dotted with red words. So now we have the red and bold hyperlinks, but no dictionary. I remember asking Retired1 about the dictionary in XenForo and he told me that it required a special addon or something.

@Oliver Is there a reason we've switched from blue (pretty standard) color for hyperlinks to red and bold? I much prefer the blue, but it's my personal preference and I understand that others may disagree.

 

[Katdarling]

We also had a feature you're describing, sort of a clickable dictionary, for lack of a better term. Loved that feature, too. It was so helpful, especially for newcomers. Dictionary words, acronyms and most commonly used abbreviations were discreetly underlined, and when you hovered your cursor over that underlined term (VG, PG, vaping), a definition popped up (a definition, not a link to anything). Subtle and elegant and informative.

@Oliver - it may be that this is possible, or un, and it may be old hat to many of us, but I ABSTOLUTELY agree with Katya that the old feature of an underlined (underlying) dictionary was incredibly helpful (definitely for me) in the beginning days.

I would love to see the little subtle underlined terms return, if only for the newbs. (Maybe for us oldies as well!)

 

[Katya]

I would love to see the little subtle underlined terms return, if only for the newbs. (Maybe for us oldies as well!)

Alas!

Xen Foro tips and tricks

Per Retired1--two years ago... but it's on the list.

Currently, there's no addon to replace the "dictionary" that we had on vB. It's on the list, though.

 

[Katdarling]

Hmmm...

In some ways, vB was the B's @gnees.

 

[Uncle]

Before XenForo, we had regular hyperlinks to newspaper articles, other threads, posts, vendor sites, etc. They were nice, useful, discreet and blue. They were instantly and intuitively recognizable as "clickables" but they were not aggressive (red and bold), so they never interrupted or distracted the reader. They were just saying, "Hey, here's more information on the subject" or "Here's a link to the study I'm talking about--click on me if you're interested, if not, just keep on reading." I loved them.

We also had a feature you're describing, sort of a clickable dictionary, for lack of a better term. Loved that feature, too. It was so helpful, especially for newcomers. Dictionary words, acronyms and most commonly used abbreviations were discreetly underlined, and when you hovered your cursor over that underlined term (VG, PG, vaping), a definition popped up (a definition, not a link to anything). Subtle and elegant and informative.

Then came the switch and, for some reason, every clickable (including the dictionary words) became red and bold. Everybody hated that--it was impossible to read people's posts as every simple sentence was dotted with red words. So now we have the red and bold hyperlinks, but no dictionary. I remember asking Retired1 about the dictionary in XenForo and he told me that it required a special addon or something.

@Oliver Is there a reason we've switched from blue (pretty standard) color for hyperlinks to red and bold? I much prefer the blue, but it's my personal preference and I understand that others may disagree.

@Oliver - it may be that this is possible, or un, and it may be old hat to many of us, but I ABSTOLUTELY agree with Katya that the old feature of an underlined (underlying) dictionary was incredibly helpful (definitely for me) in the beginning days.

I would love to see the little subtle underlined terms return, if only for the newbs. (Maybe for us oldies as well!)

Alas!

Xen Foro tips and tricks

Per Retired1--two years ago... but it's on the list.

Hmmm...

In some ways, vB was the B's @gnees.

DITTO ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ What They Said . . . Really wish I could add more comments - "Likes' - "Agreed' - "Informative" - "WINNER" ! ! !

 

[Oliver]

Hey all,

Yes, I miss that acronyms system too. Unfortunately it doesn't exist anymore (I'm not sure it even exists in vBulletin).

On to the issues raised in this thread, most pertinently by @Opinionated: I've been reading through them all and thinking deeply. This is all a bit personal (after all, I call the shots around here!), so let me just tell you my own personal ethics.

On privacy, I wouldn't be involved in anything that sold personal information to third parties. Also, I wouldn't be involved in anything that didn't take protecting personal information seriously, taking all precautions and applying all security updates as soon as they are available. And I'm not.

On monetisation - I would never "shill" for any company. The links we use only ever go to the products they say they do - there's never any trick. I'll think about how we do them though - maybe there's some styling I can apply which makes it clear that those links go to a third party.

I annotate every change we make to ECF in our analytics. I took a look at when we started doing wordlinks - 2012. So, we've been running this system for years without a security incident, and without complaint.

I also checked with our developer as to whether there are any security issues with using this system - there are none. The only issue would be if we linked to a "bad site", but that's true of any link on ECF, especially those that are made by members (we can't control those).

Indeed, there have been incidents in the past when "suspicious sites" were linked to by ECF members (I'm sure not on purpose): Google tells us when this happens, and we remove the links immediately. Running ECF is a lot of work.

In any case, most of the automatic links go to vaping.com, which definitively is not a "bad site", and nor will it ever be (see above).

If you're interested in why vaping.com exists and why I'm involved, let me explain:

I've been involved in vaping now for nearly 10 years. ECF wasn't originally meant to be a commercial site and I assumed it would be relevant for, maybe, 2 years, by which time the products would be solved and ECF's job would be done. I certainly didn't anticipate that vaping would become my career. In 2012, I was due to start my PHD in clinical neuropsychology, but then decided to carry on with ECF for "a couple of years" (again, assuming its relevance would be diminished). Well, you know the history.... and we've just had our record traffic, some 2.2 million individual visitors over the last month!

In the period since, I've done a lot. I have used ECF as a platform to get in front of academics, researchers, government, influencers, media etc etc. I co-founded the UK's E-Cigarette Summit (now also playing in a Capital City near you). I've conducted my my own research, which has been used to demonstrate the importance of "real vape" to academics and officials and, indeed, the vaping industry. Admittedly, this stuff has had the biggest impact in the UK (and I'm certainly not claiming to have been the only person to have had an impact) - but it has had a knock on effect in the US too.

To help me do all of this, I took on a staff. They are now running vaping.com. Vaping.com was something that we mulled over for a long time as to whether we should do. The answer was emphatically "yes" - We felt that we could create a website that was a great and unique showcase for the best of vape. I don't know that we've succeeded yet, but we're working on it. Also, ECF will eventually not be able to sustain the incomes of 3 people without aggressive monetisation, and we believe that vaping is better with us involved that without.

So, that's the background. Oh, also - I've been offered money for ECF several times. Enough that I would never have to work again. I turned it down because I understand the value of ECF both as an ongoing resource and as a historical document. Some people may think I'm an idiot for that, but I just really want to carry on working in vape. I believe in it and I am not a shill.

 

[Oliver]

Before XenForo, we had regular hyperlinks to newspaper articles, other threads, posts, vendor sites, etc. They were nice, useful, discreet and blue. They were instantly and intuitively recognizable as "clickables" but they were not aggressive (red and bold), so they never interrupted or distracted the reader. They were just saying, "Hey, here's more information on the subject" or "Here's a link to the study I'm talking about--click on me if you're interested, if not, just keep on reading." I loved them.

We also had a feature you're describing, sort of a clickable dictionary, for lack of a better term. Loved that feature, too. It was so helpful, especially for newcomers. Dictionary words, acronyms and most commonly used abbreviations were discreetly underlined, and when you hovered your cursor over that underlined term (VG, PG, vaping), a definition popped up (a definition, not a link to anything). Subtle and elegant and informative.

Then came the switch and, for some reason, every clickable (including the dictionary words) became red and bold. Everybody hated that--it was impossible to read people's posts as every simple sentence was dotted with red words. So now we have the red and bold hyperlinks, but no dictionary. I remember asking Retired1 about the dictionary in XenForo and he told me that it required a special addon or something.

@Oliver Is there a reason we've switched from blue (pretty standard) color for hyperlinks to red and bold? I much prefer the blue, but it's my personal preference and I understand that others may disagree.

It was a style decision - we did a full redesign when we migrated to xenforo. I'm thinking about this again while we design the new theme. Right now they're green (in the new theme)!

 

[Letitia]

Hey all,

Yes, I miss that acronyms system too. Unfortunately it doesn't exist anymore (I'm not sure it even exists in vBulletin).

On to the issues raised in this thread, most pertinently by @Opinionated: I've been reading through them all and thinking deeply. This is all a bit personal (after all, I call the shots around here!), so let me just tell you my own personal ethics.

On privacy, I wouldn't be involved in anything that sold personal information to third parties. Also, I wouldn't be involved in anything that didn't take protecting personal information seriously, taking all precautions and applying all security updates as soon as they are available. And I'm not.

On monetisation - I would never "shill" for any company. The links we use only ever go to the products they say they do - there's never any trick. I'll think about how we do them though - maybe there's some styling I can apply which makes it clear that those links go to a third party.

I annotate every change we make to ECF in our analytics. I took a look at when we started doing wordlinks - 2012. So, we've been running this system for years without a security incident, and without complaint.

I also checked with our developer as to whether there are any security issues with using this system - there are none. The only issue would be if we linked to a "bad site", but that's true of any link on ECF, especially those that are made by members (we can't control those).

Indeed, there have been incidents in the past when "suspicious sites" were linked to by ECF members (I'm sure not on purpose): Google tells us when this happens, and we remove the links immediately. Running ECF is a lot of work.

In any case, most of the automatic links go to vaping.com, which definitively is not a "bad site", and nor will it ever be (see above).

If you're interested in why vaping.com exists and why I'm involved, let me explain:

I've been involved in vaping now for nearly 10 years. ECF wasn't originally meant to be a commercial site and I assumed it would be relevant for, maybe, 2 years, by which time the products would be solved and ECF's job would be done. I certainly didn't anticipate that vaping would become my career. In 2012, I was due to start my PHD in clinical neuropsychology, but then decided to carry on with ECF for "a couple of years" (again, assuming its relevance would be diminished). Well, you know the history.... and we've just had our record traffic, some 2.2 million individual visitors over the last month!

In the period since, I've done a lot. I have used ECF as a platform to get in front of academics, researchers, government, influencers, media etc etc. I co-founded the UK's E-Cigarette Summit (now also playing in a Capital City near you). I've conducted my my own research, which has been used to demonstrate the importance of "real vape" to academics and officials and, indeed, the vaping industry. Admittedly, this stuff has had the biggest impact in the UK (and I'm certainly not claiming to have been the only person to have had an impact) - but it has had a knock on effect in the US too.

To help me do all of this, I took on a staff. They are now running vaping.com. Vaping.com was something that we mulled over for a long time as to whether we should do. The answer was emphatically "yes" - We felt that we could create a website that was a great and unique showcase for the best of vape. I don't know that we've succeeded yet, but we're working on it. Also, ECF will eventually not be able to sustain the incomes of 3 people without aggressive monetisation, and we believe that vaping is better with us involved that without.

So, that's the background. Oh, also - I've been offered money for ECF several times. Enough that I would never have to work again. I turned it down because I understand the value of ECF both as an ongoing resource and as a historical document. Some people may think I'm an idiot for that, but I just really want to carry on working in vape. I believe in it and I am not a shill.

^^^^^
This is why I became a subscribing member. I don't like all the changes, but I do recognize the forum is an evolving entity. It needs to cater to all vapers from every generation.

 

[Oliver]

(FYI, Right now I'm helping draft a response to the Canadian regulations consultation)

 

[stols001]

I think it's a tricky thing, being able to keep a really useful and informative site up and running (and profitable, because, well, if the site isn't doing that, it's not likely to be around, unless we have a Trust Fund kid hanging around (which I highly doubt) who wants to fund ECF without ads and etc., but that's not a real world outcome.

I am sympathetic to those running forums on the internet as it does become increasingly difficult and complicated. There's a fine balance between keeping the site running (via whatever methods) and say, a new user purchasing merchandize they may not need or may not be suited to them (with that said, I was able to manage that quite nicely without the help of hyperlinks, LOL).

I think that the way the links are now could possibly be improved but again, this is a hefty project. Do we want to see ECF up and functional, still, with the knowledge that the links have been there for a while? I certainly do, and I also don't think it's fair of me to ask for site changes that I wasn't even aware were there, and don't seem to be harmful other than the possibility of being directed to another website with not enough specificity? That's kind of the question, IMO.

It's never as simple as just removing a monetizing source and expecting everything to remain the same and stay operational.

I'm not a believer that someone should administrate a forum of this complexity and not make it part of their income source because frankly, the amount of work involved in doing so boggles the mind, and this is really a small part of the entire umbrella (which does include vaping.com).

It would be nice if as tools permit, links become more specific, but I do not plan on being upset about it, it is certainly true that many sites do this, and at least this one is linking to another vaping site which also contains helpful information AND the opportunity to buy vaping related products. That's okay with me.... Though of course in an ideal world, this site could be informational only.

I don't really run into such sites.... ever. At least not sites that I enjoy. Maintaining a forum with rules, moderators, and etc., is not an easy task.

Anna

 

[Opinionated]

@Oliver - I want to say a couple of things.

Ive only been here about two years (Just over) I am here because I trust the site as a vaping and advocacy platform. I also can say I trust the vetting process of the site for the vendors you allow to advertise with the site. Its why I am here and not anywhere else. I don't and will never have the same trust level anywhere else of any one else related to vaping and that is saying a lot for ECF and my view of it.

To know that I should probably have the same trust level with the vaping.com site is just a thing. I should at this point, at the very least give it a go. I DO trust this site, ECF, and going over and allowing myself to trust the business end is something I SHOULD do. Honestly, Ive been asking myself why I shouldn't, and I cannot find a reason other than my views when I first came here, which were simply scared of online dealings in general.

I have given a lot of trust to ECF, and have never once been let down. So, I figure that if I am going to stay here, then I should do it with complete trust - or not at all. I have decided to buy an item or two as need occurs, perhaps one or two times from the business end, ie vaping.com, and just see how it goes from a consumer end. As I said in the beginning, I do have a lot of trust and faith in this site, and with vaping.com being a part of that, then its a logical step to take, and very logical from the fact I am in some way also helping to advertise vaping.com.

In some ways I am sorry, as I was not intending to be unduly harsh but rather this all was a process in going through how I felt with information I did not previously have (although should have known). I can't say I am sorry for having those feelings, as that is a part of who I am, but I am sorry if it came across as something that it was not, because I do and have trusted ECF quite a lot as a vaping platform, its why I am here, and why I have stayed here these last two years.

Peace - and God Bless.

 

[Katya]

It was a style decision - we did a full redesign when we migrated to xenforo. I'm thinking about this again while we design the new theme. Right now they're green (in the new theme)!

Thank you for your reply, Oliver. And just to assure you that I'm not just trying to be difficult, there is actually a very good reason why blue has become the default color for hyperlinks, after all.

Red and green?

Why are Links Blue?

Red and green are the colours most affected by colour-vision deficiency. Almost no one has a blue deficiency. Accordingly, nearly everyone can see blue, or, more accurately, almost everyone can distinguish blue as a colour different from others. It was pure good luck that the default colour of hyperlinks is blue with underlining.
Joe Clark, Building Accessible Websites

 

[Letitia]

Red and green?

Would really dislike it if ECF resembled a Smok mod with LEDs.

 

[Katya]

Would really dislike it if ECF resembled a Smok mod with LEDs.

It might also make this forum more attractive to the children.

 

[Eskie]

Would really dislike it if ECF resembled a Smok mod with LEDs.

Never happen. ECF would have to roll out a new forum theme twice a day. What a job that would be, although at least if it's on the Smok manufacturing model, most don't have to actually, like, work.

 

[Letitia]

Never happen. ECF would have to roll out a new forum theme twice a day. What a job that would be, although at least if it's on the Smok manufacturing model, most don't have to actually, like, work.

Thanks for the reassuring words, feel much better now.