NikeTalk celebrates 1 year on the Huddler platform

I believe so.

If you remember, we actually implemented a white background on the old site, but we had to rely on some assistance from the old platform's volunteer CS team, so it was less of a fully functional feature than a CSS hack.  Thankfully, we don't have to rely on DIY "upgrades" anymore.

There's interest in the feature from our members, there's interest in the feature from Huddler, and there's been interest in the feature expressed by prospective advertisers who, for whatever reason, don't think a black-based site looks "professional."  (I disagree with them, but I certainly don't see the problem with offering users an option.)

To be determined is WHEN the feature will be incorporated and what the default will be, but, this time, we'd be looking at user-selectable themes as part of the platform itself, with the White theme likely handled by the same talented designer responsible for our current layout.  

Unfortunately, I have no timetable to share with you at the moment, but there's just too much interest from all sides for the feature to fall by the wayside.  It's probably just a matter of time.

Probably because he didn't want me to scrutinize his post history to discover all the ignorant racist trolling he'd attempted in the Trayvon Martin thread.  Smallguyscrapped.

Log in.  Registered members enjoy a reduced ad experience on both the desktop and mobile platforms.  When you're signed in, you barely see any ads on mobile at all.  

You'll have to be more specific regarding which ads you consider "shady."  Sometimes AdSense can deliver ads that aren't hand screened and can result in undesirable content.  If we can identify it and report it, we can get those out of the rotation.  As for sponsors, all of them have been drawn from NikeTalk's legit list and come highly recommended by our members.  If you consider a site "shady" because they charge above retail for rare products, that's sort of the state of the industry at this point.  It's all a game of artificial scarcity.

1. It's not part of the Huddler platform right now and it isn't a feature that any of their other sites are clamoring for, so it's not much of a priority.

2.  It's not as effective as you seem to think.  It's just a scapegoat.  Security on the whole is better here than it ever was on Yuku.  We have far more tools at our disposal to easily identify clone accounts - and to do so more accurately so as to avoid the collateral damage of banning people just for sharing the same same basic ISP/region.  We also have screening tools within the system that have prevented countless spam/abusive posts from appearing on the site to begin with. 

The waiting period was just our way of trying to cope with the inferior tools of the old platform.  While, in theory, it's nice to encourage new users to take some time to familiarize themselves with the site and with existing posts and resources before signing up and asking for hand-holding, in practice that rarely happened on the old system anyway.  If you signed up on the 30th of the month, your "wait period" was a matter of hours.  If you signed up on the 2nd of the month, you had to wait an entire month.  It wasn't fair.  It didn't slow the persistent forum trolls down enough.  It didn't prevent new users from asking questions that vets found annoying.  The only thing it reliably did was frustrate people.  

The same posts people now cry "wait period" over were present in some form on the old site.  There just wasn't the same excuse for it.  So, whenever people would see one, they'd just say "nt fell off" "too many newbies" etc. etc.  

New users come with the territory.  The best way to deal with them is to teach them properly so they can be productive contributors to the site and to help us weed out the trolls by making use of the report system.  

I've been vegan for coming up on five years now.  I'm still waiting for Nike to do me a solid and stop using animal products in their adhesives, etc.  

Maybe some day... 

I'm glad somebody caught the reference on that.  Obviously that particular avy didn't last very long given what ensued.  Personally, I still believe we had absolutely every right to maintain that forum as a read-only archive, but there's little sense complaining about it now.  I just hope nobody confuses their knockoff site for the genuine article.  If they want to continue to destroy what's left of their reputation, fine, but I have no interest in allowing them to drag our reputation down with them.