emmett: The fellowships are sorted by date.

joshi tm: I know that the fellowships are sorted by date. That doesn't help, because it is the older ones that are more likely to become inactive sooner. Like I said, 15 out of 49 fellowships on the first page are inactive. If we leave it at sorting it by date only, then we should have it from newest to oldest, with the newest ones at the top.
But I still think it is better to sort them by most popular at the top...

emmett: Maybe the list should be cleaned up by somekind of mod....

joshi tm: emmett makes a very good point. The list of fellowships is cumbersome, and in dire need of revamping. I've tried myself a few times to go through it to find those that might be interesting, but I got very frustrated after a few pages. Many are dormant, if not downright dead, and should be deleted or archived. Sure, it's a big cleanup job, but it should be done for the benefit of the membership.

Listing by size would not be of any particular use. Most of the active ones have enough incentive to swell their ranks as it is, and some are deliberately small yet vibrant.

Pioneer54: I think its a grand idea to archive 'dead' ones. Where the BB is now a pawn and there is no activity.. Maybe if FS's were listed by activity? The first in the list would be one with the most traffic?

emmett: as the fellowships are sorted now its easy to see the new ones , once you have looked through the list once its then easy enough to find the latest ones created , any other method would make new fellowships harder to find .

Jason: Unless the newest ones were displayed first...

I like Rose's idea about sorting by traffic, but I don't know how to measure that... by the previous day?....

emmett: How about just using the number of messages writen times a multiplier:

I.E:
messages writen in last x hours multiply by:
0 to 24 : x10
24 to 48 : x8
48 to 96 : x5
96 to 168 : x3
168 to 672 : x1
672 to 2016 : x0.5
2016 to 8766 : x0.1

mctrivia: I think I understand why you suggest a multiplier. It doesn't take into account those who visit a fellowship without posting any messages, though.

In the end, I am hoping for any kind of organization for the fellowship page. This all points in the direction of improving the fellowship experience in general. What I would really like to see is a list of team rankings that include wins and participation for team matches and tournaments for each type of game, and any other statistics that can be mustered. I love the idea of team play, and I think it can be improved on this site.

emmett: true though you could add another table for views also.

mctrivia: By views, do you mean the number of times someone views a link?

emmett: yes. though more acuretly number of people that view the fellowship board.