Category: the Rant Board
I’ll keep this short and to the point, I’m just asking that people take the time of day required to search, before making a clone of a clone of a clone of a board topic, that isn’t locked, and still serves a function. We do not need over 10 different iPhone/android app topics, when the vast majority of them are all asking the same thing, and one that already exists not only will serve its intended function, but will probably give you the answers you seek, or a pre-established venue to continue the conversation. Odds are, there is already something close to what you are looking for, someone’s already started a rant about blindness issues etc., , and if not, that’s when you create it. Originality is good, clutter and unoriginality is bad. There is nothing wrong with creating new topics, to replace those that are locked, or asking that a topic be unlocked, but please, before you post a topic, do some digging. Don’t clutter up the space. If I were a CL, I’d probably be doing a lot of merging of topics, simply to cut down on the unrequired clutter, caused by excessive laziness. Fact is clone topics make it harder on everyone to get the most out of this nice feature we have to express ourselves with. The least we can all do is treat the system with respect.
I agree 100%. Every forum I have ever gone to has made this a requirement, if not followed then threads would be locked and the user warned. If done again the user would be temp banned.
It really only takes 5 minutes to do a search I don't see why people don't do it here. Maybe due to the lack of forum rules.
I can't say it better myself. To start another similar topic, it is just wast of time, power, and net space. Although this might not seems to be a problem for some who regularly post on game parler and so on, but generally it is a good practice to do some searching, before recreate a topic that already exist.
I also think that every board topic should lock for new post after 12 months, or even 6 months if someone is no longer posting it. I know we have something like that in place, but it is not strenthen it enough.
I think that should happen here, what Rob says. Hey, maybe there'd be only sane people left.
James, I hear you. It's quite annoying, and it's why I don't usually post anymore... James, become a CL, dear. ;)
Joanne I would say a board topic should lock automatically after it has not been posted in for a few weeks.
Two years from now, someone who didn't search the boards to find this topic, will post a board topic telling people to search the boards. These are humans we're talking about here.
I agree with the original poster, and I admit I don't always do a thorough search.
Regarding locking topics, I like the way things are currently done where a topic is locked after one year of no posts. I think a few weeks is way too short.
haha i love this.
even more so when it comes to board topics on the raffles.
lol
In my view people will stil post similar board topics. Searching could help, but I liked it more, when topics wern't locked. Just my thoughts.
I have to disagree with locking after a couple of weeks. Topics get buried very fast. Some very good topics don't get immediately noticed. Or they need to resurface. I think the year limit is good. Trust me, a few of my topics are locked already, much to my dissatisfaction. I'm sure it's good though.
Personally, I think six months would be sufficient, but that's just me. I don't have a problem with a year, though.
Definitely agreed about the search feature. it does work, you know. the only time I can understand starting a second topic is if the original one has been locked. some would say that the staff should unlock it upon request, but what one user considers something worth unlocking it for, another user might find totally pointless.
I must admit that I don't use the search feature much but it does work quite well. I think people just want to see there board ranking go up.
the thing that really rattles my cage is when someone starts a topic, and then someone else starts a topic with a paraphrase of the same title, on the same category, only a day or so after the original was started. You don't even really need to use the search feature in that case. Just look at the list. It's not even buried.
One of the major problems here is that the forums needs it own set of Mods, not just Cl's. Will that ever happen? No.
It is a good idea I must say. I would like to see board moderators.
few weeks i think its too short. 6 months to 12 months will be reasonable.
If the topic is lock, it should take out from the board
board moderators, huh?
now that would be awsome
no, seriously.
every single forum, or group, i've been in, has them.
they could look out for multiple topics posted to that same board, and if they find some- lock them, or get the admins to lock them
as for who moderates, i think that depends on who uses what board.
for example, if you've got 100 post, 20 on the game board, but 50 on the health board- i think you should be able to moderate the health section, because it's the one you frequent most.
Ironically. I've seen several boards that complain about people not searching boards before posting. Just sayin'.
Are any of them unlocked?
I think what lightning is pointing out here is that nobody is perfect and shit happens.
Yeah, go with that, no one is perfect and shit happens. I might also add that its really not that big a deal if we have more than one topic on the same subject. Besides, what if they're just close subjects? What if you have one board that asks about the best app for new IPhone users, and another that asks about your favorite app as an IPhone user. There will be a lot of crossover there, but should you lock one?
I really can't see why people are getting quite so het up about this.
Yes it can be irritating to see the same topic more than once, but really, you can just skip past it if you don't like it. And as cody said above, you can end up with a situation where a topic is similar but slightly different, where do you draw the line then?
As for people wanting moderators on the boards, I find it incomprehensible that people feel we should have unmoderated and unchallenged free speech on here, yet people want to put limits on board postings and who can post what where and control over where and when a topic should be locked. Why?
The fact is that the boards here do not generate enough traffic or enough issues to warrant moderation on an individual level. We get maybe two or three board posts or topics reported to us a week - sometimes because of duplicate posting, sometimes because of duplicate topics (where the same user has posted the same topic in more than one place), but certainly not enough to warrant appointing moderators that are seperate from the CL's - it's really not that big an issue..
I agree; I don't know why this is such a big deal to some people. very well said, Claire and Cody.
Well, then, if it's not a big deal, why don't you just remove the search feature? sounds like a fair deal. if it's not a big deal if it gets used anyway, well, that's just another useless feature for the staff to keep track of. Why not make it easier for them and just remove it?
what are you on about?
The staff don't need to keep track of the search feature - why would they? The search feature is there for if users wish to, well, you know, search the boards. Not in order to prevent people posting things that might already have been posted. Someone might want to search for any number of reasons, just because people don't use it for the purpose which some people think it should be used, doesn't mean it needs to be got rid of.
True, something like a search when put in place needs no keeping track of.
Because surprisingly, some people might want to use the search feature to... oh... what do you call it... search! If I want to know if there's any board posts about pigmies, instead of going through the entire list of board posts ever written, I can just search for pigmies. Really, I can't believe I had to explain that. Did you really think the only thing the search function was used for was to find out if a subject already exists? Did the thought never occur to you that it might have other uses?
Cody's absolutely right. I have used that feature often to look something up that I found informative.
A bit of perspective for some of you getting all bent out of shate: When I first joined this site in 2009, people went on very snarky about people who revive old topics. Saying, to us new people, "We'd rather you enter a new topic, instead of adding to an old one."entered
Some of you just want to be upset, have something to be angry about. This chronic dissatisfaction is very repugnant.
I for one don't feel it's the end of the world. lol I just thought board moderators would be interesting.
leo, there's a term to describe people who need to find something to be upset about... professionally offended. :D
I personally don't want anyone looking over my shoulder and making sure the boards are all nice and cheerful. We're all adults here, or at least over the age of thirteen, we should be able to handle it. If you don't like a board post, or think its similar to one you've already read, don't read it. There is absolutely no need for the boards to be moderated.
You say you use the search feature to see if you can find a particular search string on the boards without having to read down the list. This is exactly what we're trying to encourage more of. we're not saying you have to go through pages and pages of categories and boards to make sure your subject isn't there. We're just saying, if you think, "hey. I wonder what other people think about abortion", try a search for abortion instead of jumping straight to the "Post a new topic" link.
Not to mention, some of the people who claim it's no big deal are the same people who complain about spelling/grammar errors in posts, posting multiple times in a row on the same board topic, and posts written with only one or two words per line.
I really do not understand why people are all of a sudden going on about free speech. Nothing was ever said in the OP about censoring what people said, only duplicate threads.
Neither myself nor Stormwing said anything about any of that. It basically sounds like some are just assuming rather then using reading comprehension.
Also cutting down on reposted threads like "Please help with X iphone app" would not only make the boards less cluttered, make them easier to search, but would make them an overall more enjoyable experience, in turn this would probably bring more people to the boards. I know I really don't post here all that much cuz of all the mess and clutter.
Obviously many here have never visited a real forum on any other site to see how they are ran. I am a mod on another site, and we never "look over other peoples shoulders".
The point of having forum moderators usually isn't to censor what people say. It's for damage control, to reduce clutter as others have said, and yes, to step in if topics get too out of hand. However, I don't think that would work on this site, because some people have a holier than thou attitude about what they should and should not be allowed to post.
Now, I'm not saying that there's ever much that I see on these boards that really should be moderated. I also think, given the amount of drama that tends to come up on these boards, people would probably abuse their power if they suddenly found themselves able to moderate board topics. Then there would be clutter all over the place, whining about topics that should be locked or unlocked, why certain users locked topics, etc. Having moderators on this particular forum would be a recipe for disaster.
also, might I bring attention to a similar topic, called "Bored Etiquette, or general lack there of on this site", that hasn't been posted to for a little while now, so it's a little way down the list. In any event, the duplicate topic point, as well as a few others, were mentioned there, and the only point that people really seemed to disagree with on that topic was Point 5, about implimenting some sort of review option to rate other people's posts. I didn't hear too much fuss about Point 4, which was the point about duplicate topics. In fact, people that have disagreed with this particular rant have stated that they agree with the original poster on the other topic. some people even went so far as to thank him for bringing attention to it, and hoped others would take note. There was nothing about censorship or free speech anywhere on that topic, so what gives on this one? Granted, the other one was a bit more general, but I didn't see any of you who posted that you agree with that one say anything like: "Well, I agree with you, except on the matter of duplicate topics. You're just making a bigger deal of that than it needs to be".
By the way, for those of you who are going to come back and point out the irony that there are duplicate topics about duplicate topics, I'll admit you do have a point there, but that still doesn't explain why you agreed there, but disagreed here, unless of course you just overlooked that particular point, in which case it can't really be that big a deal after all, or it surely would have stood out to you more.
Fire and Rain, I think we posted at the same time. Having said that, you do have a point about moderators not working on this site, at least not if they were there to control content.
I agree, I was a mod on another bored topic and it would be silly to banned anyone for anything really. unless that person was being really really rude, or something. And, I agree with everything the original posters said. and board mods would be so cool.
those of us who posted to the similar topic as this probably overlooked that particular point, Jessica. I can't speak for others, but I know that has been the case with me before. *shrugs*.
Well, then, it obviously isn't really a bigger deal than it needs to be, if the point was so easily overlooked.
Because there is a difference between you choosing to do something on your own, and being told to by some third party. I think it is probably good manners not to make duplicate board posts, and its certainly a lot less annoying to have a board post which contains more than just lol. However, I do not think we need to have people looking over our shoulders to make sure what we're posting on the boards is right or wrong, or acceptible, or even related to the topic.
I believe that A. it is your responsibility to make sure you have a valid post, and B. it is my responsibility to skip over it if I don't want to read it. There is no need for a moderator. There is only need for common sense and the ability to realize that you don't actually have to read any posts you are annoyed by. Which, before you ask, no I don't read the board posts that annoy me. I have no qualms about skipping to the next one.
Basically, you don't have to read the duplicates if you don't want to. No one is going to know that you skipped over it without reading. Feel free to do so if you so wish.
Again, moderators on message boards are not there to be your parents. They simply watch the boards. As another poster put it, damage control.
I'm not saying the introduction of mods will insure there will never again be posts that any one of us won't like, and therefore, will choose to skip. I'm just saying it would be nice if people would use a little more common sense when posting/creating topics. for example, if you wanted to share your thoughts about Siri, on the iPhone 4S, chances are, you're not the first one to have decided to discuss it on the boards. a simple search will confirm or deny this belief. In theory, we really shouldn't need mods for this, there is always the "report problem with post" feature as well, but just as the CL's will move a topic to its appropriate category when it wasn't created there, would it really take so much longer to murge two duplicate topics? Nobody has to get banned. Nobody's questions have to be left out, and no content has to be removed. If it turns out that's too difficult to code, then I can accept there's really not much else that can be done besides requesting that people use common sense, but then again, that seems to be missing from real life as it is.
I refer you back to my earlier question. If you have two extremely similar topics, how do you choose whether to merge them or not? And whom do you trust with this ability? Would you want this post merged with the post about posting politely? And if so, why wasn't it just written there instead of creating a whole new topic which we now have to read, formulate opinions to, and reply to? And again, who are you going to allow to decide?
That doesn't even take into account that posts are long lists of posts which all refer to each other. If you have a post that says I agree with post twenty-three, and post twenty-three originally said cats are adorable. then you merge the two, and twenty-three now says that cats are the scurge of humanity and should all be killed brutally, you've changed an entire post. How are you going to negate that? What order would you put them in, how would you make sure the message of each one was still clear, and that the order of both posts wasn't interrupted.
Besides that, what real harm does multiple posts do? I mean, posting a topic in the wrong category doesn't do harm, but it messes up browsing, sort of like having a book that is on the wrong shelf, it just doesn't belong; then the CL's move it, and all is fine. No content of the post was changed, and all are happy. But what does it harm to have more than one post on a subject? Maybe one person phrased the topic more clearly than the other? are you going to delete the bad one, despite the fact that people have posted toit? What made you allowed to control other people's posts if you decide to go that route?
In short, why not just skip over them and not make such a big deal out of posts you don't like?
because not all topics are very obvious duplicates until you actually start reading. I'll admit some titles are so similarly written that it's a wonder the subsequent topic creater didn't copy the original title intentionally. But there are others that look different at first glance. For example, a topic on Zone BBS Suggestions and Feedback might be called "ability To remove Posts", and a second topic could be called "Just an idea", but that idea is the ability to remove posts. I know there is an instance of this on that category, though I don't know if this was the idea in question.
But if a person does what you siggested, Jess, somebody would complain:
"Oh, so and so posted to this topic and it's not locked but kind of old!" Should we walk on egg shells for everyone?
people that resurrected ancient topics to post "I agree," irritate me far more than someone who posts a topic that has been posted before.
So you prevented that from happening again, but not this? the implimentation of topics locking after a year pissed a lot of people off, but it still got done, and nobody is rushing to take that feature away. But we can't have this one. Oh no. that would make some people angry.
I agree with what sugarbaby said. Posting to an old topic to say "lol" is stupid. On the other hand, if you have something of value to contribute, fine.
Actually, as much as I'd love to take the credit for changes that are implemented here, I don't think j and Chris would thank me for doing so - it is the admins who implement changes here not the CL's.
And there is a vast difference between resurrecting an ancient topic purely to post "lol," or "I agree," or even to post advice on a thread where the op has probably moved on to a different world, and posting more than one thread on the same subject.
Have no idea why topic locking would piss people off. If a topic hasn't been posted on for a year then it's not likely to be posted on at length again, is it? I think things like that piss people off just because it can.
There is also a difference between posting another topic on the same subject because the first one is locked, and posting one because you're too lazy to see if there is already a conversation of this nature going on.
I don't understand the real harm in that. I guess it could get annoying but is it the end of the world? I think not.
to be honest though jessica it wouldn't occur to me to resurrect a years old topic just because it was on the same subject that I wanted to post on. Because I would assume that A, thoughts/opinions/strategies had moved on since then, B, that most of the contributors to the topic had moved on since then, and C, that my query would be less likely to get a decent response if it was purely tagged on to the end of a topic that had been posted some time ago.
Yes if a topic was posted days ago and was still ongoing I would add to that rather than post a new topic, but any more than a month or so ago I would start a new one.
yes, I'll admit that duplicate topics posted just days and weeks apart annoy me more than the ones that are posted months apart.
If what you had to say was a direct contribution, digging up an older post and writing on it doesn't seem like a big deal. It would also save board space when you think about it.