I can quite see how you would want to continue splitting threads such as Brexit when they start getting unmanageable or painful on a phone.
But I wonder if it is worth considering that rather than splitting them rigidly around 100 posts, that you decide to split them anywhere between 100 and 150 [say] but at a lull or break in conversation.
A bit more effort on behalf of the Mods, I appreciate, but it would make it flow better. And as long as I keep a civil tongue in my head then you ought to have plenty of spare time anyway.
And on a purely personal level, when I've spent ages typing a large analysis, for example, I do find it frustrating to then discover that it was post 99.
Still, your call of course.
|
|
To be fair, it looks like they split off a small chunk to the start of the new thread which helps a bit with the flow.
|
|
"to be fair"???? Get a grip on yourself, man. Since when did we start that approach?
|
>>but at a lull or break in conversation.
That would mean someone would have to read the thread. I wouldn't wish that on...…
:-)
|
Maybe a warning sign "Thread Split Ahead - 10 posts", so people could start slowing down and getting into the right gear for the next section?
:)
|
|
Maybe we need an extendable transition period as we approach post 75 on each volume...
|
I tend to play it by ear, and try and move a few conversations over to the next thread. Not always possible though. It just depends if I can find a suitable place to cut and stitch.
Sometimes I'll let a thread go to 120 to 130 replies, then try and create a the next one.
If I can see a particular thread slowing down, then I won't bother creating the next one.
|
It sounds fun. If a thread is getting particularly acrimonious you can just say "I think we'll take a break here", and then everyone loses track of where they were and things calm down.
Like offering a cup of tea.
|
|
Good point Cliff. Never thought of it like that ;-)/
|
Well for goodness sakes leave Brexit Vol. 67 active until Tuesday morning at least.
Pat said that is when she would be back.
She's a got a ton of stuff to catch up on and if she has to answer stuff in a different thread to the question it might cause a certain amount of overload.
She reckoned that by then she will have read the draft transition document, the political statement, the various links people have posted and the posts themselves.
I'm not sure I fancy her chances, but let's not make it even more difficult.
|
|
She could try the Movilogo option. Read nothing but clip soundbites from your favourite RW media.
|
>> Well for goodness sakes leave Brexit Vol. 67 active until Tuesday morning at least.
By then I would imagine it will have more than 200 replies.
>> Pat's a got a ton of stuff to catch up on and if she has
>> to answer stuff in a different thread to the question it might cause a certain
>> amount of overload.
I'm sure she has enough intelligence to reply to any questions in subsequent volumes that are created.
|
>>By then I would imagine it will have more than 200 replies.
So? I would imagine that most people don't read it at all, and those that do read it would appreciate longer threads keeping stuff together.
This is big and complicated stuff impacting the future of our country. Rigid adherence to arbitrary rules seems a little inappropriate. At the least some increased flexibility would help.
Have you had anybody say that they would prefer the thread was cut off every 100 replies? Someone who actually reads it, I mean.
>>I'm sure she has enough intelligence to reply to any questions in subsequent volumes that are created.
I am sure that she does, but why make it more difficult for the sake of it?
|
>> This is big and complicated stuff impacting the future of our country.
Granted, but keeping it in bite sized chunks of around 100 replies is better than in very long threads of over 200 replies.
>> I am sure that she does, but why make it more difficult for the sake of it?
How difficult can it be to read something in one thread, and reply in another?
All you need is two browser windows open. The locked thread, and the current opened one.
If on the other hand you don't want us to create new volumes, then we'll just sit on our hands and let it grow and grow.
As per usual, damned if we do, damned if we don't.
|
Damned if you don't? By whom?
Just saying, let that one grow a bit. Who does it bother? Anyone?
P..s. I do most of this on a phone, two browser windows? You're having a laugh.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 19 Nov 18 at 10:41
|
>> Just saying, let that one grow a bit.
At some point a new volume will need to be created to keep it manageable and prevent people endlessly scrolling downwards.
>> Who does it bother? Anyone?
Well it seems to bother you that we create new volumes every 100 replies or so. Like I said before, people can read one thread and post any replies in the next thread, making reference to what they're replying to. Having two browser windows open makes it even simpler.
It's not rocket science.
|
Thread splitting - Lygonos
