Poll Should the teams and drivers forums be merged?

[Brogan]

Now that we have thread prefixes, we can consider merging the teams and drivers forums.

So instead of having four separate forums as it is now:

Teams (Current)​

Drivers (Current)​

Teams (Past)​

Drivers (Past)​

We could have two forums and use thread prefixes to denote current, past, and future teams and drivers.

Teams​

Drivers​

Or possibly we could just have a [Current], or even better, [Active] prefix and all other threads would have no prefix?
Using prefixes would highlight if it was a current team or driver, and clicking a prefix would filter all threads with the same prefix.

So, what is everyone's preference?

Leave it as it is or merge and use prefixes?

 

[tooncheese]

To be honest its pretty obvious whether or not a team/driver is currently in f1 or not.

 

[Brogan]

Agreed.

But some wanted to be able to separate discussion on current drivers from past drivers, and the only way we had of doing that at the time was to have separate forums.

With the new prefixes we can filter in the same forum, so best of both worlds.

 

[Josh]

I wouldn't mind them being merged, there are only a handful of active threads in that entire sub-forum anyway...

 

[FB]

I'd prefer to keep the separate forums for teams and drivers but would be happy to see the two forums merged with prefixes for former and current.

 

[Brogan]

Yes FB, that's the proposal.

One for teams, one for drivers.

I just tested it quickly on my localhost installation using a single prefix of [Active] and it seems to work quite well...
Probably better than having 2 or 3 prefixes, as it's immediately obvious which are the currently active driver threads.

Let's give it a try and see how it works.
It's easy enough to change back if people don't like it.

 

[Brogan]

The proposed change has been implemented, to see how it works.

As ever, feel free to comment and give any feedback on any aspect of the site.

 

[FB]

<off topic> Does Felipe Massa really count as an "Active" driver, wouldn't "Passive" be a more appropriate description?

 

[Josh]