I was reading that people are getting mad about threads that are identical to eachother. I agree with that, but what about if the threads are mildly different?? Becasue some of the times people make the same thread implying something different then the original thread, then they get there threads banned. Remember im not talking about threads that are exactly the same. I am talking about ones that do have some differences but are still focusing around the same topic. Your views?

[edit on 24-9-2009 by Maddogkull]

If the only thing that is different about the tread is the OP's idea or thoughts then they should add on to the ongoing thread there is no need to stort another one.

It depends. If it's calling Alex Jones a Hoaxer, you can have many multiple threads on the issue but if it's like maybe a news story there can be only one thread on it

Well im guessing on how different they are, can you immagine one big 9/11 thread? It would dwarf "warning from the benovolents" and "my violent encounter with and alien" in a matter of hours.

Is also depends how old the original thread (s) on the topic are. If there is some thread about a topic that already exists, but it is a year or two old then of course there needs to be a new thread made. But if the new thread is made within hours or even a month or two from another one then yea, the poster should probably just add to the existing thread unless to do so would derail the original thread too much. Of course that is all my personal opinion and nothing more.

Originally posted by Maddogkull
Should threads exist that are similar to eachother?

Hasnt this question already been asked in another thread? Just sayin'