Can I just ask.....?

[magemanda]

One thing that is really, really, really bothering me about this forum currently (one of the many - I don't think is a forum I will frequent for much longer, if I'm honest!) is the way the mods deal with deleted posts/spliced threads.

Spliced threads are horrible - joining two threads together even worse. Suddenly you have a situation where you just don't understand anything of what is going on in the thread. Who is replying to who? Where is the original comment that sparked someone else's answer? Just nasty to follow, especially when you don't even realise that two threads have been joined until you are three pages in (Sometimes I am not on the forum for days at a time, and then have problems catching up with what has been going on).

My second point is about the deleted posts. On every other forum I frequent, if a post is deleted, the mod will leave a comment in red where the original post was, stating 'Post Deleted' and giving a reason why. You then know whether it was a flamey comment, or whether someone had gone against Board Rules etc and made it easier. In threads currently, there are people making comments about a post that doesn't even exist anymore.

Could a mod take these ideas on board and maybe try to come up with a better solution?

 

[Prairie_Girl]

Avoiding spliced threads is quite easy, if people woud just do a search before they started a new topic and reply to that one, instead of creating a new thread. I understand sometimes the search doesn't work, and I do think it's a little silly to splice two threads when one is current and the other one from like 2003 or earlier.

 

[sirmyk]

On the same note, if a thread is spliced, and part of it moved, it would be nice to have notice in the original thread signifying the move, as well as a link to the new thread.

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

On the same note, if a thread is spliced, and part of it moved, it would be nice to have notice in the original thread signifying the move, as well as a link to the new thread.

Yeah, this is something that was annoying me the other day. I went to a thread to do a post and discovered that the end of the thread had been moved. I then had to search through various threads before I found where it had been spliced to.

 

[Halo]

Yes, good idea. We will post a message in future saying where the split posts have been moved to.

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

Yes, good idea. We will post a message in future saying where the split posts have been moved to.

Thanks, Halo.

 

[RobertFKennedy]

Avoiding spliced threads is quite easy, if people woud just do a search before they started a new topic and reply to that one, instead of creating a new thread. I understand sometimes the search doesn't work, and I do think it's a little silly to splice two threads when one is current and the other one from like 2003 or earlier.

I find it hard to understand this obsession some seem to have with not having more than one thread on the same subject.

I really cant see what harm it does if someone starts a thread about a book that people have posted about in the past.

People might want fresh comments or debate on something and if people have to wade through 4, 5 and 6 pages I think it puts people off responding to the thread.

When people post about a book and people say theres already a thread about it it's often an old, old thread with no responses for months and can have a lot of responses from people who no longer post here. regardless, whats wrong with a bit of fresh discussion on something?

Also, i dont think people should feel beholden to do a search every time they want to post something.

 

[Ronny]

I think the main problem is that many do a search on a book and pull multiple threads, which can be a bit much. Especially if it's late and no one is around to talk with so you are looking up books in the search area and you come across maybe 3-5 threads not including any of the currently reading, recently purchased, just finished results. It's kind of overwhelming. I don't think it hurts to have the old threads brought up even if you want a fresh take on it, some of the older members gave great views on the books.

 

[mehastings]

I think the main problem is that many do a search on a book and pull multiple threads, which can be a bit much. Especially if it's late and no one is around to talk with so you are looking up books in the search area and you come across maybe 3-5 threads not including any of the currently reading, recently purchased, just finished results. It's kind of overwhelming. I don't think it hurts to have the old threads brought up even if you want a fresh take on it, some of the older members gave great views on the books.

I find that the best bet is to search the titles only. That way, at least you only get threads that were specifically about that title.