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

I dont think it should need to be mod intensive. Just a little programming that would, say when the thread reached 25 pages or so, enable a new feature called "update" to appear on the OP which the OP could use to ADD information, but not remove any.

That way, the OP could collect together relevant info that had been added, and tack it on as an update themselves, but not remove anything that would materially change the nature of the OP.

It doesnt have to be hard. Or time consuming for the mods.

Originally posted by Wolf321
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.

You know another thing, when a thread has become inactive for period xx (could be months) it could be closed automatically.

reply to post by Wolf321


Oh man you mean one will need to apply for thread condenser......I know lets just get the editors for Readers Digest to come in and condense the threads.

I can understand fine what your saying ,but the natural course of a thread is actually what makes them interesting....I think the thing is there is a high membership so it does only take a few mins when a thread of interest takes off for it to become overwhelmingly lengthy.....But in it's own rite that is why the thread is interesting....Uninteresting threads die an early death.
Now i believe one of the longest running threads was created by Proto (guessing here) where all roads lead to rome.....now what makes that thread so good is not only the exceptional presentation but also all the interest in which the memebers contributed and it is enjoyable to go back and read it from time to time just to always read all the comments by the members.

I can also understand that It can take time to read through the Rubbish to get to the comments that may be of velue to ones self but that is ONLY of value to ones self.....Every memeber has their own interpretation of each and every comment ...that is why there is such vigorous Debate ....It is because we do not all agree...would you agree?

not that disastorous summary was done for that specific reason ....It was to show that summaries alone could take away for the OP and then become the debate itself.

Also when a thread is summerized does that soon become the end of the debate.....ok nuff said so you people who only log in say once in a blue moon can never comment because job done ...we have summerized it and we the Gods have decided this is what has been said and no more needs be said.

I think your ideas are for making threads a little more less time consuming is not a bad idea....But what also makes a thread interesting is the varied and wide spread comments from all aspects of life.....then there is also the troll issue.......some threads get over run very quickly by trolls ....and when this happens the summerizations will be troll based which you know and i know happens in many top threads on subjects such as 9/11,muslims,Jews,ufo's.

And just by reading what i am typing here the summerization of a single posting could get complicated yet in itself...

so really really i will summerize what i am saying here.

Good concept.........Just not practical.

reply to post by 11andrew34


Now this is one i have seen over and over myself and it definately shortens threads as all replies by individuals to another individual on a given thread are nested and the flow of the OP's opening statement does not wander from the original posts regarding the OP.

Also not only that it keeps personal attacks sidelined from general view so others don't have to see the rantings and ravings between two or more individuals who want a good *itch session.

There is a Dutch forum I visit from time to time, they use a method similar to the one you describe.

They let a thread come to 12 pages then it get's automaticly locked and the members open a new chapter of that topic with the same OP as in the orginal and update it with a summary of the last chapter or any relevant news conserning that topic.
They have a button that pops up on the last post to automaticly c&p the op(you can edit) and starts a new thread.

Example: "Ufo over NY" the follow up would be "Ufo over NY #2: Media silence" etc. Keeping the overal topic but adding some personal input after the :.
I found this to be working pretty good.

Thanks,

Edit: The thread that is closed is moved to a vault of some sorts so it doesn't clutter the board, it's still easely found if you want to read back.
OnlyLove

Check out this post by TrowaBarton.

For those who are popping in every 10 = pages or so and saying the same thing. Here is what we have done.

It's from the "Fox News reported OBL's death DAYS EARLIER!!!" thread, which is currently at 81 pages.

That's exactly what we have been talking about. Including the part about members thinking that others don't read all the posts and just skim over them.

I think it's a good example of what the summary should be like and how it would help.

Good idea but I also think people need to contribute not just say "nice post S&F," that takes up alot of useless space.

The mods arent super human and it's hard enough to keep up with off topic and one liner posts.

Personally I think certain forums need more mods and some mods need to go since they never mod.

It is my opinion that if you dont log into ATS a certain amount of time per week and contribute you shouldn't be a mod. A mod should be someone who contributes or is on the site often and can really help out and see the problems.

I know I alert as much as I can but I feel bad because I know there are only so many on at one time but alerting does help.

reply to post by plube


I hear what you are saying about the benefits of reading the whole thread, and why you enjoy them.

It is much like people who enjoy novels. I personally hate novels. I don't like the formats of them. I'm more of a textbook or reference pleasure reader. Now I can just as easily get the complete synopsis of a story and its main players in a paragraph without needing to read the book. Sure I may miss out on some clever play-on-words in a dialog or linguistic mannerisms that endear a reader to a character, but it's ultimately not necessary.

The novel (or thread) would still be available, and summaries would make them easier to sort through to find those little pearls.

reply to post by Casandra


Thanks for sharing that. It is a good example of the usefulness of the idea. That thread is also a prime example of when a summary could be useful.

I noticed the thread Japan declares 'nuclear emergency' after quake, which is still active and has reached 850 pages!! Now, sometimes a thread doesn't sound interesting to me and I don't check it out, however, when the size gets to large that I wonder if there must be something interesting there that the title didn't elude to. But I don't know anyone who honestly has the time to hash through 850 pages.

The biggest concern I have seen from the posts in this thread is that there either aren't enough mods, or the mods are currently overworked to have to deal with something like summaries for the small percentage of threads that would require them. I don't really see that as an issue. I don't know enough about coding for a forum to know how difficult adding a summary feature would be, but I think that might be the only hard part.

I was thinking it may be good if you could sort the order of posts in a thread by number of stars, instead of by date/time order. That way you could see the main points that had been covered in a fairly short time. This would be great for people (like me) who don't have the time/inclination to read through whole threads, but still want to know what main points etc people have raised on the topic.

reply to post by d1993r


But then you would only see the comments most people agree with. Sometimes important information is posted and not many people agree with it, so they don't have many stars.

In other cases, people may post a one line sarcastic or funny comment (I'm guilty of this too) and get lots of stars. And the comment doesn't necessarily add anything to the thread itself. Have you noted the "off topic" signs with lots of stars?

Maybe have a list of posts based on number of stars?

reply to post by Deaf Alien


Stars don't always mean quality. Funny, one-line, off topic posts get many stars, while informative posts sometimes don't get any.

reply to post by Casandra


Hmm you are right. I feel the OP. There has to be a solution.

The recent thread Mass shooting in Aurora, CO (At Batman Film Premiere) is another prime example of why ATS needs a summary feature. There are 138 pages as of this post. There are countless posts of people asking the same questions, posting the same information etc. The whole thing might only be 50 pages if the repeats and off topic posts were eliminated. A summary every 10 pages by the OP and forum moderators should could have helped speed the flow of information and discussion.