Supplement Sub-Forums

[charlie]

What should the Supplement sub-forum sections be called?

-Vitamin A

B Vitamins
-B1
-B2
-B3
-B5
-B6
-B12

-Calcium

-Cascara Sagrada

-DHEA

-Vitamin E



K Vitamins
MK-1
MK-4
MK-7

-Magnesium
-Natural Dessicated Thyroid NDT
-Pregnenolone
-Progesterone
-Taurine
-
-????

*I will update this post with the sub forum names and will start adding them as I can.

 

[Such_Saturation]

K, DHEA, Cascara Sagrada, E, Taurine(?).

 

[4peatssake]

We could do broader categories here as well perhaps?

Vitamins
a. A
b. B's (sub category for each)
c. C.
d. D.
e. E.
f. K.

Minerals
a. Calcium
b. Magnesium
c. Iron
d. Copper
e. Selenium
f. Manganese
g. ETC

Amino Acids
a. BCAA
b. Taurine (technically not an amino acid but probably best put here)
c. ETC

Hormones
a. Thyroid (NDT, synthetic)
b. Progesterone
c. Pregnenolone
d. DHEA
e. ETC

Other
a. Cascara Sagrada
b. Activated Charcoal
c. Caffeine
d. Aspirin
e. Cyproheptadine
f. Ginger
g. Lisuride
h. Apple Cider Vinegar
i. Baking Soda
j. DMSO
k. LSD (kidding!)
l. ETC

There could even be other broad categories we could create to include for some of these "others." These lists are by no means exhaustive, just off the top of my head, such as it is this day.

Another thought is to make mention the uses for each supplement and provide where possible both the pharmacological and "natural" resources available to address the same problem/condition/issue. May be too much of a a tall order though. :P

 

[Such_Saturation]

Frankly I find the current sectioning already excessive and analytical. My advice would be to go ahead with this only if the end result is solid and evident in your mind.

 

[4peatssake]

Frankly I find the current sectioning already excessive and analytical. My advice would be to go ahead with this only if the end result is solid and evident in your mind.

What would you prefer in terms of organization?

There is a vast amount of information and wisdom contained on this forum. How to we best disseminate it and make it more readily accessible, and as Charlie described in another post, provide the means where it can operate without the need for a search function?

 

[jyb]

I agree that it seems a bit too refined. Why not add a keyword functionality? The author of a thread would add keywords corresponding the content discussed, and there would be keyword search function easily accessible (so, somewhere near the existing search button). Or integrated in the existing search function.

I don't think it's essential, though. When I need to gather the information written on this forum about a topic, I like use the search function to make sure I'm not missing anything. Even if the search returns 20 pages, it doesn't take that long to go through to the essential.

What I would like to see however, is a small Save button (near the Quote button) on each msg so that it get referenced in a folder, with possibility of adding a brief note about it. A bit like a favourites bookmarks. The folder could be accessed in the control panel.

 

[4peatssake]

I don't think it's essential, though. When I need to gather the information written on this forum about a topic, I like use the search function to make sure I'm not missing anything. Even if the search returns 20 pages, it doesn't take that long to go through to the essential.

It depends on the search.

If one wants to search for Vitamin A for example, it brings up 387 pages because of the way the search function works!
In the case of any vitamin search, it's better to use Dan's Search Engine otherwise you gotta wade through every post with "vitamin" in it.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Frankly I find the current sectioning already excessive and analytical. My advice would be to go ahead with this only if the end result is solid and evident in your mind.

What would you prefer in terms of organization?

There is a vast amount of information and wisdom contained on this forum. How to we best disseminate it and make it more readily accessible, and as Charlie described in another post, provide the means where it can operate without the need for a search function?

The archetype thread concept was intriguing I think. One stuck thread for each thing, with all our knowledge. We can have one thousand sections but we still will need the View your posts button or the newsletter to keep up with our posts. This need will increase with the number of sections, unlike the need for the search button.

 

[Bruv]

I agree that it seems a bit too refined. Why not add a keyword functionality? The author of a thread would add keywords corresponding the content discussed, and there would be keyword search function easily accessible (so, somewhere near the existing search button). Or integrated in the existing search function.

Search tags (keywords) can be pretty useful if the moderators keep control of them. I've seen some tags get way out of hand with people tagging posts with the date and putting two different ways of spelling the same word such as "multi vitamin" and "multivitamin". Another one is when they don't enclose the phrase in quote marks and you end up with tags called "multi" and another load called "vitamin" which makes them pretty much useless and cluttering up the place.
Even though this is a forum that is mostly devoted to all things Ray Peat, many people will still seem to think they need to tag their posts with "Ray Peat" and then of course you will get those people that don't use quote marks and you will get two more search tags added to the list with "ray" and "peat" so now you have another three useless tags. One forum I use will only display so many search tags and the search tags have now been allowed to get out of control, so many of the useful tags have been pushed out of the tags box by useless tags such as "thursday" and "mr". So what I am saying is the tags would be great as long as the mods are not scared to get in there and edit or delete them to keep it more streamlined.

 

[Bruv]

If one wants to search for Vitamin A for example, it brings up 387 pages because of the way the search function works!

Can't somebody get onto phpBB and get a proper search put on here? Most forums I go to can be searched much easier than this one. For example on many forums if the phrase is enclosed between quoute marks you would only get the posts that use the phrase "vitamin a" rather than every post that includes "vitamin".
Having to make lots of sub-forums just because the forum's own search function isn't as up to date as so many other internet forums doesn't really seem to me to be the best way to fix the problem when a better search function could be installed.

 

[Dan W]

For example on many forums if the phrase is enclosed between quoute marks you would only get the posts that use the phrase "vitamin a" rather than every post that includes "vitamin".

One trick I use for advanced searches is a bookmarklet that runs a Google search against whatever site is open:
http://www.macworld.com/article/1147101/googlesite.html

You can use any of Google's advanced search features with it.