Go ahead lock this post

[jjtheglove]

Sorry, I have been reading this board for a while and something has bothered me. Everyone goes into freak mode when someone post a message similar to something someone else has posted and they have designated areas for you to post your comments. While, I think it looks organizaed at times, it can become a bit much. I read a post through when it has like 20 posts. Then I come back and there are 100, some off target, some relevant. The thing is, I have to find out where I stopped, what is wrong with a person posting something in a new thread to keep people from having to click next page 30 times on one thread? Just my thoughts.

[zachlaka]

???

[jjtheglove]

Lets say someone started a thread on Prince having Boras as agent a month ago. And someone brings it up today, it seems that they will be referred to the previous thread. I have seen it a few times, just wondered if it annoyed anyone else.

[SeriesFinale]

This belongs in the "Issues" section of the forum...I've taken my gripes there before, now you can too. Not that hard to figure out.

[Fatter than Joey]

Toby should make one of those cat pictures -- I'z been in yer threads, locking yer posts"

[And That]

Is this topic some sort of subversive Abbie Hoffman parody?

[And That]

Toby should make one of those cat pictures -- I'z been in yer threads, locking yer posts"

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/6011564896de9c243f7204f41306b439da095d3.jpg

[Brian the Automator]

Sorry, I have been reading this board for a while and something has bothered me. Everyone goes into freak mode when someone post a message similar to something someone else has posted and they have designated areas for you to post your comments. While, I think it looks organizaed at times, it can become a bit much. I read a post through when it has like 20 posts. Then I come back and there are 100, some off target, some relevant. The thing is, I have to find out where I stopped, what is wrong with a person posting something in a new thread to keep people from having to click next page 30 times on one thread? Just my thoughts.

Honestly, if you wanted the staff to take you seriously, I wouldn't have titled this post with a jab at our policy. That's not really nice. And saying we go into "freak mode" really isn't a way to garner any support from us either.

 

There are several things which make Brewerfan.net unique from other sites, and are strict attention to detail I feel is one of them. Obviously, it's a judgement call as to how far back a thread should go to remain "current". To me, duplicate threads are more of a burden than "mega-threads", because it makes people post the same thought twice. Now, we could go the Sons of Sam Horn (SOSH) route and pretty much only have huge mega-threads to the point where to me it's cumbersome.

I'm sure it bugs some poeple, but I've heard from more people who like it the other way. I'm not going to make the site a free-for-all like other message boards. We're different for a reason.

 

 

 

 

[jjtheglove]

Yeah, I guess I was perturbed when I wrote it. My apologies on that, but you have to admit you guys are pretty quick on it:0) You are correct about my post not garnering support and that is not typically how I would go about it. I guess it would have been better to pose the question on how far back a post should go. Then suggested a time, and said after a certain time, lock it and allow at extension to be started. Just a thought. Sorry about the earlier negativity..

[mothershipconnection]

I guess a lot of it depends on the topic and the length of the previous thread. If the topic was, for example, "Where will Gross fit into next year's team?", and it was discussed two weeks ago for 3 pages, there isn't a need for a new discussion since the only changes are the loss of 2 relievers and addition of another and a catcher. Likewise, a discussion of Braun's defense won't be any different than one from a month ago. In both cases, it's not as if mods lock threads in the spirit of "I don't wanna hear it", but because there was probably a decent discussion before and there's no sense "wasting" good thoughts and posts so we can simply re-type the same opinions. Some threads really are the same thing, so there's no point having concurrent identical discussions. For example "fire Yost" and "How awful is Yost?" don't need separate threads.

 

There are some topics that get absolutely beaten to death, and are more likely to get locked when we've just recently had a similar discussion. Other times, the idea may not really be something that can stand on it's own and would be better incorporated into an existing thread. For example, a thread of possible scrap-heap bullpen options could probably just absorb a discussion of a random garbage reliever being non-tendered.

 

I'd say that in many cases, if it's a new twist on something that's not on the first two pages, a new thread is OK unless it's a really tangential idea or huge debate.

[1992casey]

Adding to mothership's thoughts, the number of pages thing can vary depending on how busy the board is and how many threads per page a member is looking at in the discussion lists. (Members do have the ability to change that; Brewerfan's default is 20 thread titles per page; I have mine set at 40.) I'd submit that members should look at several days worth of thread titles.

 

But, as is stated above, it's a judgment call. The good news is that duplicates aren't the pain in the butt they used to be; merging threads is a pretty straightforward process for the mods. (Splitting threads is another story, but that's not to say that we won't take the time to do it. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif)

 

In some cases, though, it may simply be a situation where a mod is aware of a pretty good thread that's a decent fit for the newly posted topic. It may be recent or it could be older. As an example, a few weeks ago, I merged three Elijah Dukes threads, even though two were quite old. That was simply because in this mod's opinion, it seemed to be cool to have a one-stop shop for those who hadn't been following the story up until that point.

[Thurston Fluff]

unless it's a really tangential idea or huge debate.

 

With word usage like tangential it's no wonder you're a moderator.

I like the idea of one thread for one subject. If there are two threads with the same theme some good points will be made on each but not be read because someone was in the other thread. Especially with such a stat heavy subject as baseball.

[TerraceReserved]

The only things that bugs me with these megathreads is this: a topic can be going on about anything, a trade, FA, a player, and the topic has a lot of pages. Then the thread title is changed for something that happened after the thread was originaly started and I wanna go check it out in the thread and have to wade through 8+ pages to find a single thing. Not a big problem, just a bit annoying at times.

[1992casey]

When we were on ezBoard, we were limited to 60-character thread titles. We now have 254 characters available; that's very nice for addressing situations like TerraceReserved describes. (I don't think anyone wants to see 254 characters being the norm for thread titles, but we do like descriptive titles, and having the option to go that long is sure nice when it's needed.)

 

Now that each reply has a number along with its own link, maybe the mods can somehow incorporate a note saying exactly where in the thread an update is. I'm guessing that information would probably be better placed as a note at the bottom of the lead post than it would be in the thread title. Comments?

[TerraceReserved]

Casey, the idea of having a note that says exactly where an update is in a lengthy thread is a great idea. I agree that the bottom of the lead post is probably the best place to put it.

[brettac1]

What I would personally like, and maybe this isn't the thread to suggest it in, is an option to click on an arrow or something that takes you to the first unread post in a thread. Since I have Yuku set up to display 100 posts per page (or whatever the maximum is), I have to do a lot of scrolling, even when I click on the number for the last page.

 

Any chance of that, casey? Or does it not make sense?

[1992casey]

What I would personally like, and maybe this isn't the thread to suggest it in, is an option to click on an arrow or something that takes you to the first unread post in a thread.

I recall seeing that suggestion at Yuku Support at one point, but the suggestion probably came from a peon like you or me. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif Chances are that a Yuku staff member would have seen it, but I have no idea how seriously that idea might have been taken.

 

Yuku has a lot on its table, and some suggestions are easier to implement than others, but I've seen ideas put into place very quickly when they've been easy to deploy without a lot of coding effort. (I've actually suggested a couple things all by my little ol' self and seen them implemented on the subsequent push.)

 

Anyway, I think this is a great idea. I, too, would like to see something implemented that would take members directly to the first unread post of a thread.

 

Ideally, I think such a feature should jump members right to the new post while keeping the page structure intact. In other words, a member should be taken right to the first new post in a thread while still allowing him/her to scroll up to see preceding messages--unless the new post is the first one on a page.

 

By the way, the Lobby forum at the link above is available to all members, not just forum administrators and moderators. It's kind of a free-for-all for questions, suggestions, and off topic stuff. Netiquette, outside of turdism, isn't all that strict. In other words, you can post there and not worry too much about creating a duplicate thread or anything like that.

 

I might get over there to make this suggestion, but I haven't had a lot of time to spend around Brewerfan or Yuku recently. If you want to, start a thread, let me know, and I'll chime in to support the idea.

[brewers19]

The Something Awful forums have a feature like that; a little button next to the title that lists the number of unread posts in the thread, and clicking it takes you to the first unread post. There's also an option available where posts and/or threads that have already been read are shown in a different color (i.e. the background has a very slight bluish tinge). They're great features, and I'd love to see Yuku give us something like that in the future.

[rwa12]

There's also an option available where posts and/or threads that have already been read are shown in a different color (i.e. the background has a very slight bluish tinge).

I thought that this was to point of the little baseball next to the thread title. Once I have read a thread, it goes away, and returns when someone has posted something new.

[logan82]

Yeah, but when a thread is 12 pages long and you haven't been on the board for even a few hours you can lose where you are.

[1992casey]

If you scan through a thread, the baseball that appears in the discussion list also appears at the top of any new, unread posts in a thread. If you look for those icons, you can pick up where you left off.

 

The suggestions in the most recent replies in this thread intend to improve on that. MLB.com's forums actually do this; you're jumped to the first new post in the thread. The downside occurs when first new post isn't clear in regard to what it's responding to. If a reader is unclear, s/he has to hit a link to go back.

 

If Yuku could set things up so the first new post you saw showed up in the same manner as the "Link to reply in the thread" option that members get when they click on a message's url button, you wouldn't have to link to go back; you'd simply scroll upward to see previous messages unless the first new post happened to be at the top of a page.

[logan82]

If you scan through a thread, the baseball that appears in the discussion list also appears at the top of any new, unread posts in a thread. If you look for those icons, you can pick up where you left off.

Now that you mention it and it is on the post, I notice it. I hadn't noticed before. Thank you.

[1992casey]

Now that you mention it and it is on the post, I notice it. I hadn't noticed before. Thank you.

It works well until you're seeing more than one page of new posts. Most of the time, that doesn't happen, but if there's a 'big event' thread, automatically bringing members to the first post would be cool. At least there's something available that works pretty well most of the time. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[brewers19]

The problem with the baseballs in the posts is that you have to correctly guess which page you left off on. Say, if you think it was page seven but it turns out to actually be page six, upon navigating to page six the baseballs have since disappeared and you're stuck.

[whizkid]

That's why, for those that haven't already done so, setting the replies per page to 100 in preferences reduces the guess work in getting to the correct page. I find it very easy to scroll down through those 100 replies to find the baseballs. The Rolen thread is now only half way through page 3 when set to 100.