This platform is dead, this subforum is dead.  It should not be found right next to the "Microsoft Flight Simulator" forum on the forum list.  I cannot tell you the number of times I have accidentally clicked on this forum in the past several months.  

Go away, please.

-eelis-

My request is both reasonable, and logical.  Do you offer rebuttal, or merely ad hominem?  This is a DISCUSSION forum.  If you disagree, feel free to state your reasoning.  

Whilst it may be true that Flight is dead as you say, there may well be simmers out in the world who still use the product and/or might want to refer back to posts within that forum. As you know, the internet is a massive reference resource.

Playing devil's advocate one might argue that the MSFS forum should not be immediately below the FSX forum, lest I click on the MSFS forum in error...

We have voiced our opinions, so I believe your request now lies in the hands of the AVSIM mods.. unless other members join the discussion with a few more words than "go away, please"

Mods really have no say in the forum structure.  It lies in the hands of Forums ADMIN.

💵 talks, 🐂💩 walks!

 

😉

maybe more of a reading problem than a forum problem...

I check here everyday just to see if anything has popped up.  If you can't click on the correct link then that would be operator error.

(Mis)clicking on a link really isn't cause to move/archive something.

The 3 posters above have zero experience in UI design, and it shows.  I admittedly have minimal experience in this field myself, but I know enough to say that it is a BAD idea to place links with similar names sequentially in a list, for the reasons I already cited.  

DID YOU JUST ASSUME MY EXPERIENCE LEVEL?? Wow..  

Seeing as this forum is not using the LCARS UI of Star Trek the Next Generation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCARS, nor having an interface which holographically projects links into thin air, to then be manipulated by hand gestures, then I think that having names in a sequential list works perfectly fine. Dictionaries have long since been organised in such a fashion back when the UI was just the person physically turning a paper page..

In  my case yes, you're correct on the UI design front 

To add a bit more weight to my argument, this thread is the only thread on this forum with any activity in the past 2 months.  It is also the most active thread in the past 6 months.  If there were such a thing as digital tumbleweeds, they would be blowing across the dirt road that is main street in this one-horse town.  

Can’t work out why avsim would waste bandwidth / storage hosting a forum that has zero use.

Microsoft has given up on it, and has another sim coming altogether. It’s over.

 

This forum should be archived.

To get it right, the other sim you are referring is basically Microsoft Flight 2.

-eelis-

5 hours ago, MaDDogz said:

Can’t work out why avsim would waste bandwidth / storage hosting a forum that has zero use.

They're not wasting bandwidth if it isn't getting used and they're not using a ton of storage - as in, the only thing taking up a noticable amount of space is images.

12 hours ago, TechguyMaxC said:

To add a bit more weight to my argument, this thread is the only thread on this forum with any activity in the past 2 months. 

That's all fine, but all it does is add around 5 seconds to th time you spend on avsim. Not just that, but maybe making the font larger would help? Unless you're in a hurry you shouldn't be misclicking links.