So why are people putting charts in REVERSE chrono order again?

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by Phoenixent

Most people want to see the latest event first.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree with that statement I re-assert my position that it is true, while tracking people's Careers, you want to see the most recent event.

It's the classic "What have you done lately?" just like a resume.

BUT .... When I'm doing historical research (which is what I do A LOT) especially in the non-weapons aspect of my job, I always find out when it first appeared BEFORE i find out when it last appeared.

Case in point- while working on ANOTHER prohibition movie, I discovered through research that the Chicago Police Uniforms in the 1987 Film 'The Untouchables" were anachronistic, and would not be adopted until six years AFTER the setting of the film. They would have been wearing the old NYPD style double breasted tunic with the five pointed star, versus the military coat with Sam Brown belt and the six pointed star that appears in the movie. Knowing when the uniform was discontinued would be less helpful than knowing when it was adopted.

Again, I will accede to the vote of the majority of the MODs. But I don't buy that 'everyone wants to see it a certain way'

Historians don't list eras or trends or items in reverse chronological order. It depends if the MODS want IMFDB to be a scholarly historical site or a pop culture trends/Career tracking site like IMDB, because IMDB really focused on tracking what is POPULAR with the masses at the moment. (which is why they have that stupid Starmeter tracking system)

[Gunmaster45]

It isn't a huge deal either way really, if you want to see where it all began, you could read from the bottom up or vice versa.

I understand what you are saying, but think about this. How many not-well-know gangster movies from the 1920s-30s-40s-50s would have to be scrolled through on the M1911 page before people found more well known movies? Could this possibly turn off some users?

One thing to bring up, aren't we considered the IMDb of firearms? Wouldn't following how they work make us more of a sister site to them? Just wondering.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Again, I will accede to the vote of the majority of the MODs. But I don't buy that 'everyone wants to see it a certain way'

Agreed, that's kind of a lame argument in favor of the reverse chronological order.

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Historians don't list eras or trends or items in reverse chronological order. It depends if the MODS want IMFDB to be a scholarly historical site or a pop culture trends/Career tracking site like IMDB, because IMDB really focused on tracking what is POPULAR with the masses at the moment. (which is why they have that stupid Starmeter tracking system)

...I think that's kind of a narrow way of looking at it. IMFDB is both a historical site and a pop culture site. And so, I think, is IMDB, in its own way. The reason why I personally think that a reverse chronological order makes sense, for almost ANY type of database site, is because when it gets updated, most people will find it easier to add to the top of a list rather than scroll to the bottom. This may not seem like a huge issue for guns that have only appeared in a handful of films (that we've documented), but it would seem a bit unwieldy for guns that have appeared in hundreds of movies (i.e. the Beretta 92F or 1911).

This is one of those things that makes me wish IMFDB was a true "DB" like IMDB (instead of a Wiki) - everything could be standardized, and there might even be options to display data in either form of chronological order. But I suppose there's no sense gripping - it is what it is.

Also, I admit that the reverse-chronological order was decided somewhat arbitrarily. I am the one who first suggested it, and several of the other Admins went along with it, so I figured we were in agreement. But obviously, if there is a consensus in favor of your position, then I too will concede to democratic processes. That's what it's good for talk about this so that we know we're on the same page.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by MT2008

Also, I admit that the reverse-chronological order was decided somewhat arbitrarily. I am the one who first suggested it, and several of the other Admins went along with it, so I figured we were in agreement. But obviously, if there is a consensus in favor of your position, then I too will concede to democratic processes. That's what it's good for talk about this so that we know we're on the same page.

Thanks What initially bothered me was that I (and some others) didn't like the reverse chrono order, but when I brought it up, those concerns were pretty much ignored and everyone just assumed that Reverse chrono was the way to go. Which is why I pressed it again and asked for folks to (at the least) state their case and vote on it.

Because IMDB does it in reverse Chrono, I'm not going to be heart broken if the majority votes against Chronological order. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things (thought as a 'historian' I'm also used to things being a certain way, but I can adjust ), but it's good to have these discussions EARLY in the process. I'm sure IMDB had it's own board room discussions as to the best way to present their data.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Because IMDB does it in reverse Chrono, I'm not going to be heart broken if the majority votes against Chronological order. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things (thought as a 'historian' I'm also used to things being a certain way, but I can adjust ), but it's good to have these discussions EARLY in the process. I'm sure IMDB had it's own board room discussions as to the best way to present their data.

Actually, IMDB has sometimes made changes regardless of how the users, or even many of the admins, felt. See the new format of the front page? The reason for this is that some users complained that, with all the ads and whatnot, the front page was taking too long to load, so it was streamlined. But some others complained that it doesn't look as nice. I'm not sure what kind of decision-making was done, but I gather a lot of people still seem pretty unhappy with it, looking at their boards.

[Ace Oliveira]

I know this is a old thread, but i oppose the idea of not letting anonymous users from editing. A lot of them make good edits. We just have to not let them create pages. That is all.

[Gunmaster45]

Some of them make good edits, a lot of them add wrong information, screw up formating, spam, troll, etc, etc...

[Ace Oliveira]

Well, looking at Wikipedia, most of the Anonymous users are like that. However, since our site is really small, most of our edits come from Anon users. So if we don't let them edit, we will lose a lot of content.

[Vangelis]

Originally Posted by MT2008

The reason why I personally think that a reverse chronological order makes sense, for almost ANY type of database site, is because when it gets updated, most people will find it easier to add to the top of a list rather than scroll to the bottom.

But when you get down to it, the people who's chief concern is how 'easy' it is will just add entries at the top or bottom regardless of any date order whatsoever and let someone else fix it for them. Unless we arrive at a state where we've covered every gun appearance in every movie currently in existence, most of the additions are likely to belong in the middle of the tables anyway.

[Gunmaster45]

One day it would be nice if we ran like IMDB. Only the administrators (or any good users turned into administrators by that point) could edit the pages, and if people wanted to make additions, they note so in the discussion section of the page.

That way it is like on IMDB when you add info and it has to be cleared by the Admins before it is placed on the site.

The only thing I can't figure out about this situation is how we'd be able to accept any more good users or admins. from that point on, since they wouldn't have the same editing privaliges anymore.