The Beast with a thousand posts: Threads that go on for pages, and pages

reply to post by JBA2848


Interesting sites. They don't seem to work worth a darn, but a neat idea. Perhaps in time.

reply to post by majestictwo


Thanks.

Yeah, I too have missed out on some likely good threads because I simply don't have the time to invest in ONE thread so long.

I think the OP should have a role in such an idea, but sometimes, a thread goes beyond the author and new people come into it. Threads that go on for years are such. Therefor, a mod would be required to maintain summaries.

Looking over some of the most popular forums, it doesn't look like many of the threads make it to 8+ pages. I don't know how many mods ATS has, and for each forum, but I don't think the workload, especially with the thread author involved, would be that tasking.

Plus, I don't suggest it be retroactive. That would be too much.

Originally posted by Wolf321

Plus, I don't suggest it be retroactive. That would be too much.

Hmm... wouldn't that be easier? I mean, if we took care of old threads first (not that old, of course, but say... a couple of months?) then there wouldn't be many new posts, so we wouldn't have to spend that much time in it making new summaries.

Anyway, I'd volunteer if the Thread Condenser idea was put into action

I think this is a good idea. But i think the op should be the person to do it. As they are the ones who usually will follow the thread the most. Far as relevant info. It should include facts and opposing views to each side. Most of the time threads that get that big is usually breaking news. So most of the summaries will be mainly facts.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by Death_Kron
It's a nice idea but to be honest the mods already have enough to do,... .

This has come up and I have to ask, are mods paid? I thought mods were a volunteer force doing it for the ATS community and a few access/authority perks.

If it is a 'free' position, I don't see how adding more to the force is bad, unless ATS has a history of mods abusing their authority.

reply to post by Wolf321


As far as I know, the mods here on this site are not paid and many are contributing members like me and you who also have been chosen for their loyalty, integrity and willingness to help administer the board.

My point being was that, although I like your idea, in practice you will always find threads that have the same thing being said by different people in different ways. I do understand the frustration, many times I've looked at a 20+ page thread and added my own thoughts (even though it's been said countless times already)

Like I said, tis the nature of the beast.

Originally posted by Wolf321

Originally posted by Death_Kron
It's a nice idea but to be honest the mods already have enough to do,... .

This has come up and I have to ask, are mods paid? I thought mods were a volunteer force doing it for the ATS community and a few access/authority perks.

If it is a 'free' position, I don't see how adding more to the force is bad, unless ATS has a history of mods abusing their authority.

I think it's more a matter of time. I mean, as you said this is a volunteer job and they also have PAID jobs that require their full attention. So when they do have time, they have to go through all the complaints and posts and that in itself is already a lot of work.

New people would be needed for this, people who are specifically dedicated to write summaries, not monitor the other members' activities.

reply to post by Casandra


I think that would be nice, but you would always be playing catch up. Picking a starting point and going from there will soon have the vast majority up-to-date.

You could have an archivist do the retroactive review to add summaries though.

Originally posted by Casandra
New people would be needed for this, people who are specifically dedicated to write summaries, not monitor the other members' activities.

Well necessity is the mother of invention. Could there be a new category of 'mod' on the horizon? A legion of capable contributors may be waiting in the wings.

I've always felt that threads should auto-close/lock after either a) at least 12 mos. old, or b) the thread reaches a predetermined post limit, say, like 300 posts.
This would solve several issues such as threads becoming so large that it takes a day to work your way through,(which is fun when the conversations by the latter end of the thread has no relation to the initial post), and would also help stop the recent trend of necroing threads long since abandoned back some four to eight years ago.

I can't count how many times over the last decade of visiting this site I've found myself asking "how is this thread not dead yet?"

reply to post by jhill76


unfortunatrly may OPs simply post partisan / scaremongering / disengenuos crap and abandon the thread

reply to post by Wolf321



LOL, bureaucracy.

I don't think anyone else has the time that you find yourself short on. Nice idea, but it is just shuffling your time shortfall off to someone else..

My preference is having all the information on a topic in one long post because it saves time when doing research and also keeps updates all in one place so that everyone gets the word. That's my bias, and I understand not everyone feels this way (some seem to prefer and even welcome dozens of posts on virtually the same topic, which to me, impedes research and communication and adds multiple layers of disorganization, confusion, and frustration).

That being said, I don't think having humans writing summaries is necessary. However, I think it's an absolutely great idea that we add some ATS tools to the wish list to help us manage large threads.

I suggested one myself in another board discussion thread for a bookmark feature. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Additional tools might be a function that's sort of like the existing Posts in Thread function for ndividual posters that allows you too see all responses to a particular post...call it View Replies to Post or something

In addition, you could have a keyword by thread search function for all posts by entire thread or by poster or even by date.

There are also things we can do and habits we can form as posters to help preserve some order and some sanity, and one of those is to use the Reply feature more often. This would also help for future features like View Replies to Post.

reply to post by dethduck

All due respect, but there is value in preserving and updating old threads. New information becomes available that can radically change or even negate information in the thread and that thread needs to remain viable for updates.

And in the end what difference other than to the negative does it make if you are educating yourself on a subject if you read one all-encompassing thread versus or 20 smaller threads. How many people would even take the time to search out multiple threads to ensure they're 1.) not repeating information or 2.) missing things.

One way to improve this I've seen out there on teh internets...

I think it's called 'threaded view' as opposed to 'sequential view' like is the basic view on most forums.

Generally, when you turn 'threaded view' on there is a + next to a post and you can see all the replies to that post. They usually expand in a tree style view. You'd then click a - to collapse the tree. It's like the file explorer in Windows, basically. When you reply to a post, it is connected in a branching hierarchy underneath that post. Forums that use it often have the option to turn it on or off in favor of ordinary sequential view.

I guess it'd require new board code and you probably couldn't do much for threads past.

Goood news everyone!

I found out that when I find a good post you will have to sift through 300 pages of retoric.

Nah im only exagerrating but I have this issue, sometimes.

Okay lets put it to the test within this post....

- important issues in this thread...------None
- Does this thread help with people posting-----Nope
- was this thread informative------Nope
- would more Mods make this thread more informative----Nope
- Mods are Not Gods-----they are just the same as any other Joe Bloke on ATS
- do people who get bored after the first ten posts who are to lazy to read what all members might have to say on a given subject need a summerization.....----Learn to read
- was this summerization helpful and useful to this thread...---Definately not
- should we let God decide all our fates...---I will choose my own thank you very much

I can see the scenarios now.

"Oh, your one of those who never reads the thread. You just read the summaries and think you're up to speed. Well, if you would have bothered to read the individual posts, you would know I already said that..."

People will become summary readers instead of thread readers. And it will also be offensive to many that they're posts are being skipped over for summaries. The problems with this could be endless.

And I'm not bashing you're idea OP, just playing devils advocate.

Fortunately, I have read the all the posts in this thread, and see some possibilities with a variation on your ideas, as well as Lucidity, Davidgrouchy, 11andrew34.

How bout it SO and Springer? See any good ideas here?

One thing that might help is a offline forum/thread reader. You tag the thread thread you want to read and it downloads to your computer for reading when you need distraction, entertainment, or a sleeping pill. Give you time to check out the issues, and write a response.

Thanks.

reply to post by Wolf321


I think its a good idea too. I dont always want to read 100 pages just to see if there have been any real updates. I would love for the ability to update the OP to kick in after a specific number of pages.

Great idea.

Some interesting replies.

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
My preference is having all the information on a topic in one long post because it saves time when doing research and also keeps updates all in one place so that everyone gets the word.
...
There are also things we can do and habits we can form as posters to help preserve some order and some sanity, and one of those is to use the Reply feature more often.

I agree that the posts should remain the lengths they grow to naturally. Having summary points would not eliminate the ability to review an thread in its entirety.

Yes, forming good habits would help. Unfortunately, some people never develop then or ignore them. For others it takes time, sometimes years. I don't see these changing anytime soon, if ever. Like many advances, sometimes the features need to be there or people to see the benefit, before they realize how useful or ideal the new feature is.

Originally posted by 11andrew34
I think it's called 'threaded view' as opposed to 'sequential view' like is the basic view on most forums.

This would be useful. I have seen them before, but they have their disadvantages too. You can end up with a thread that seems to branch off into different directions, and when they do, the side scrolling is annoying.

I would like to see a version of it here. When you get these large threads, sometimes someone replies to a post on page 2 that is on page 21. The author may not be following at that point.

Originally posted by plube
Okay lets put it to the test within this post....

You have clearly illustrated you inability to summarize information. You are no longer a candidate for the position of Thread Condenser. Thanks for applying.

Originally posted by Klassified
People will become summary readers instead of thread readers. And it will also be offensive to many that they're posts are being skipped over for summaries. The problems with this could be endless.

Yeah, there is no perfect system. However, I think the idea does improve the ATS experience. I would like to see the exact percentages of threads by page count to see how many would be affected by my idea.

Typically, some of these uber threads are good topics or have good information, and as seen by a few post here, keeps people out of them because of their size and the time to get into it. So what happens, many times you will see another thread pop up that is so similar, people can actually participate and do, but it becomes a duplicate thread and closed. referring back to the 30 page monster.

For these massive threads, yes you would have summary readers, but the summaries would be enough to catch people up on the pertinent info, instead of having to spend another 2+ pages rehashing information covered, because someone didn't want to hash through 30 pages. I can't blame anyone who can't or wont do that. In an normal conversation, a person can join in and get a summary by the participants without having to repeat verbatim the whole conversation. It's more natural for back and forth communication.

Originally posted by barkingdogamato
One thing that might help is a offline forum/thread reader. You tag the thread thread you want to read and it downloads to your computer for reading when you need distraction, entertainment, or a sleeping pill. Give you time to check out the issues, and write a response.

It would still require having to commit a great deal of time to accomplish, and you could amass a backlog of threads that continue to grow, which by the time you finish reading them, are no longer active discussions.