One thing I really like with our so-2005 LG is that, being simple, it loads quickly, especially on a slow Internet connection.  Just my 2 cents. 

I have had LG load instantly in rare cases. It always happens when I least expect it. I just type in the address, hit enter, and BAM, the page loaded in a few milliseconds.

Yeah this site does load extremely quickly for me as well. Even with slow connection.

If the site works as it does----leave it alone!

I agree that the site itself its pretty much just fine, there are a few tweaks I think could be nice for everyone, such as a better way of being notified of comments, maybe make it similar to facebook where it will show a 1 on the top corner you can click and it shows and links you to a comment on something you're related to, instead of relying on that email system.

Another one is i noticed when people put pictures in comments of topics, It does not show up on mobile and users there will miss out on potential info like an example of lighting fixture layout etc.

Other than that I don't see any thing else necessary , But a big shout out to all the admins who keep this site running on their spare time, they run a tight ship here and its great

@Lightingguy1994, I agree with you and never really thought about that. I do rely heavily on my email
notifications to notify me when I get a comment to a picture on this site. I've never been PM'ed on this
site yet though so I never look for: "Hey, Suzukir122, you have 1 message, 1 is new." lol
I too, also want to give a big shout out to all the administrators on LG, as well as whom ever may have
created this site back in 2005. This site is awesome!

I know I haven't been a contributing member (comments and images), this site is slow to load a lot. I am not complaining about it. I am on a fairly fast internet connection (50Mb down) and a a decent laptop (Core i5-4210U 1.7/6GB DDR3/Win7x64). I am an active member of other forums.

Can I suggest admins to look at vbulletin-based badcaps.net/forum? It is fast-loading and by no means modern. Their main admin (topcat) has no intentions to upgrade to a newer version. He works on older computers (hardware-level mainly) and the forum runs fine. I am talking about Pentium 3 cpus. They also have a 'lightweight' version for those users phones that don't play nice with their default '2010' version. They also have their site set up where you must be a logged-in member to view images and attachments. All images must be 2000x2000 or smaller and be less than 2MB. Images are stored on their servers, not 3rd party/off-site such as photobucket.

I dont like vB for their VERY excessive use of javascript, atleast in the last versions. I am like the badcaps guy, use old hardware and replace badcaps in it once in a while ^_^... So i'll take your word for old versions of vB being okay. However, if they are old versions then what do we achieve over using the existing SM forum as it is ? Most of us appear to be happy with the current SM, the only real reason to replace it is if it is aging security-wise and unmaintained. Are the old versions of vB maintained either ?

This SM forum in LG is usable even with JS switched off completely

One forum system i considered decent, atleast a few years back (when i was looking into it for some project) was FluxBB. It is not completely JS free but i never found it to be obtrusive and it was very fast, even when running on a server inside a VM with low allocated resources

I love the site as it is. I am not into the latest and greatest things. Most of my furniture and other related stuff is from the 70s and never updated because it still works so why replace it. I am more function than form.

I know I haven't been a contributing member (comments and images), this site is slow to load a lot. I am not complaining about it. I am on a fairly fast internet connection (50Mb down) and a a decent laptop (Core i5-4210U 1.7/6GB DDR3/Win7x64).

Seems very odd to me.
The site loads fast for me.....my connection and computer are way slower than what you've got.

HTML5 enables embedding video with a tag, same as one would embed a picture. Very appropriate, after all they are both rectangular graphic objects. The HTML code gotta provide the position on the page. The actual content of the graphic is none of the HTML's business. HTML5 is the first standard that got this right after years of half broken workarounds and hacks with HTML4 / XHTML 1.1
--------------
HTML5 is the same plain HTML with which plain and workable web pages have allways been made. All the dirty tricks - and especially data transfer without page reloading (AJAX, ...), stupid animations, .....Its all Javascript

The video thing would be good if it worked right, but fact is Flash still works better (and no I'm not a Adobe/Flash, fan I personally think it sucks...but fact is atleast it works. (with allot less of the go/stop/sputter/stop/buffer/go crap))

HTML5 has all that element crap LOL

Oh and another extremely vile/dirty little trick (this one probably tops them all! - but it also might also need JavaScript?) is to make an image be an element and instead delivering it normally (ie: with HTTP) you deliver it with WebSockets .. its there, it looks like any normal image, but since its an element, not an image, you can't: right-click, adblock image (and no its not the JavaScript trick of "disable right-click" that works in Internet Explorer, as FireFox has an option to disable "disable right-click")

There is also some way places are doing one of those extremely annoying things that scrolls through a set of pictures - usually done with JavaScript - but in this case I'm pretty sure they've done it without. (Maybe a 'canvas' thing?)

(And ofcourse another top of the list vile thing is the CSS 'overlay' (though that ofcourse ain't a HTML5 thing))

The site loads fast for me.....my connection and computer are way slower than what you've got.

Same

The video thing would be good if it worked right, but fact is Flash still works better (and no I'm not a Adobe/Flash, fan I personally think it sucks...but fact is atleast it works. (with allot less of the go/stop/sputter/stop/buffer/go crap))

It works right for a few years already, atleast for me in Youtube. You might have some local problem

HTML5 has all that element crap LOL

Oh and another extremely vile/dirty little trick (this one probably tops them all! - but it also might also need JavaScript?) is to make an image be an element and instead delivering it normally (ie: with HTTP) you deliver it with WebSockets .. its there, it looks like any normal image, but since its an element, not an image, you can't: right-click, adblock image (and no its not the JavaScript trick of "disable right-click" that works in Internet Explorer, as FireFox has an option to disable "disable right-click")

There is also some way places are doing one of those extremely annoying things that scrolls through a set of pictures - usually done with JavaScript - but in this case I'm pretty sure they've done it without. (Maybe a 'canvas' thing?)

(And ofcourse another top of the list vile thing is the CSS 'overlay' (though that ofcourse ain't a HTML5 thing))

HTML5 got the power for lots of things. But we are not going to choose forum software that abuses it

One way to implement the "you cant save picture" thing is done with any HTML and CSS, all they do is place a 1x1 pixel transparent image (stretched to the same size with "width" and "height") covering the image you want. So when you try to save the image you get the 1x1px thing instead. One solution is to save the page (as HTML file + folder with all the stuff) and find the picture in the folder. Another way is to take a screenshot. Third is to then upload the screenshot to Tineye and let it find another copy of the image on the internet

HTML5 got the power for lots of things. But we are not going to choose forum software that abuses it

Yep, I know LG would never abuse stuff like that - not that it'd matter anyway since I only use LG on my main/old computer & none of those tricks work there..
If they did go full HTML5 (or certain ones of those modern forum softwares (1 in particular I can think of but don't remember the name)) it'd just make the site un-useable for me...so no big deal, I'd just leave.

One way to implement the "you cant save picture" thing is done with any HTML and CSS, all they do is place a 1x1 pixel transparent image (stretched to the same size with "width" and "height") covering the image you want. So when you try to save the image you get the 1x1px thing instead. One solution is to save the page (as HTML file + folder with all the stuff) and find the picture in the folder. Another way is to take a screenshot. Third is to then upload the screenshot to Tineye and let it find another copy of the image on the internet

Actually I wasn't trying to save the pic, just get its URL so I could block it (and any others in its place). Since it wasn't a picture that couldn't be done.
I google'd it, and that particular site had done just what I described. Its a new dirty little trick that can be done.

or certain ones of those modern forum softwares (1 in particular I can think of but don't remember the name))

Invision Power Services forum software (also known as IP Board)
Horrid thing.
I've given up on 2 forums that downgraded to that thing.
(oh and one of the 2 has since went away too.)

Eventually someday the sites softwares going to have to be updated, I'm not sure it can be secure another 10 years. By the looks of things, most members love the current look and feel so when the site must get an upgrade and a theme needs a rebuild, we can maybe look at preserving the current look and feel as much as possible while still enjoying new features. As for icons, if updated high deff ones are needed, I volunteer to be the guy who does that.

Eventually someday the sites softwares going to have to be updated, I'm not sure it can be secure another 10 years. By the looks of things, most members love the current look and feel so when the site must get an upgrade and a theme needs a rebuild, we can maybe look at preserving the current look and feel as much as possible while still enjoying new features. As for icons, if updated high deff ones are needed, I volunteer to be the guy who does that.

From what I know about web design it should be possible to transfer this site to a newer platform and add new features while keeping the same theme and appearance.