PDA

View Full Version : Noticed an annoying trend...



astromark
2011-Feb-11, 05:56 AM
:shifty:That a subject gets divided into multi threads that should not have been started.. If the subject is being talked of why not just join the conversation ?
I can see some point to starting a fresh thread so as not to hijack some one else's...If the subject is different.. Just have a wee peek at those three threads about the Universes expansion..Why is it three threads ? They are the same descusion.. well almost., and near enough...
and that if this is all I have to worry about... life's all good here.
Mark in a strange place.:confused:

Moose
2011-Feb-11, 11:20 AM
If they're ATM threads, then it likely means that three people are making claims. So as not to interfere with each person's defense, which is, of course, limited to 30 days, the threads are necessarily split. Otherwise, each person would be diluting/hijacking the others' time.

Bob Angstrom
2011-Feb-11, 06:18 PM
I can see some point to starting a fresh thread so as not to hijack some one else's...If the subject is different.. Just have a wee peek at those three threads about the Universes expansion..Why is it three threads ? They are the same descusion.. well almost., and near enough...What is wrong with three different threads on the same topic?
I can see some point to starting a fresh thread so as not to hijack some one else's...If the subject is different.. Just have a wee peek at those three threads about the Universes expansion..Why is it three threads ? They are the same descusion.. well almost., and near enough...What is wrong with three different threads on the same topic?
I can see some point to starting a fresh thread so as not to hijack some one else's...If the subject is different.. Just have a wee peek at those three threads about the Universes expansion..Why is it three threads ? They are the same descusion.. well almost., and near enough...What is wrong with three different threads on the same topic?

Dalkeith
2011-Feb-11, 06:26 PM
I've been in a few forums - recurring topic discussion is a theme among most.

slang
2011-Feb-11, 06:54 PM
It would have been less ironic had OP reopened one of mugs' threads on this topic. :)

astromark
2011-Feb-11, 07:27 PM
@ Bob... very, good. X 3...
@ Moose yes agreed., but in Q/A ?
.... I am going to use the word arrogance. In that its not wanting to be part of some one else's thread.
It just makes keeping up with the conversation tricky... one thread would make life easy... but easy is hard for some...
I have obviously had too much coffee.... thanks all.

Swift
2011-Feb-11, 07:53 PM
@ Moose yes agreed., but in Q/A ?
.... I am going to use the word arrogance. In that its not wanting to be part of some one else's thread.
It just makes keeping up with the conversation tricky... one thread would make life easy... but easy is hard for some...
I have obviously had too much coffee.... thanks all.
In Q&A I'd generally like to see a fresh thread. Q&A is really not for long drawn out discussions/conversations, it is for someone to ask a question and get a mainsteam answer. If your question was exactly answered by the old thread, well, you shouldn't need to ask a question. But if your question is related, but different, start a new thread.

But if you have an example which you think shows your point, please either post the links or PM a moderator.

And please, don't use the word arrogance - it is entirely too negative a word to describe another member's posts, and none of us know someone else's motivations.

Extravoice
2011-Feb-11, 09:29 PM
...If your question was exactly answered by the old thread, well, you shouldn't need to ask a question...

If the BAUT search feature worked better, there might be fewer new threads.
I'm not sure what (if anything) can be done about it, but it is *really* weak.

Or perhaps this somewhat OT comment belongs in a new thread :)

Van Rijn
2011-Feb-12, 06:13 AM
If the BAUT search feature worked better, there might be fewer new threads.
I'm not sure what (if anything) can be done about it, but it is *really* weak.

Or perhaps this somewhat OT comment belongs in a new thread :)

Do a site search with Google. That works quite well. I almost never use the built in search.

astromark
2011-Feb-12, 11:03 PM
What is happening here... could we have some consistency please...
Now we have FOUR threads all talking expansion... Ifs, buts, and Questions...

Just asking of you all... To consider using the 'Astronomy' Thread for these discussions of detail of word meanings...
When it looks like the 'Question', was answered long ago...

pzkpfw
2011-Feb-12, 11:21 PM
What is happening here... could we have some consistency please...
Now we have FOUR threads all talking expansion... Ifs, buts, and Questions... ...

We don't tend to merge new threads with old ones on the "same" topic. Otherwise we'd probably just have seven threads in all of Q&A anyway. A new person asks an old question, we answer it anyway (there's no issue with providing a link to an earlier thread with good answers in it).

And while two topics might look the same, if a mod thinks they are different, a thread will be split.

For example this thread was started:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/112574-New-guy-here-with-questions-expansion

With the base question:
... At what level does this expansion take place? Could there be expansion happening at an atomic or molecular level as well?

Jens added this question:


... how do we know the expansion is of space itself, and not simply the objects flying away from one another in non-expanding space?

Well, sorry, but I felt that a question about the level at which expansion is occuring is quite different to a question about whether that expansion is occuring at all. So Jens' post was moved to a new thread: http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/112580-does-space-expand-or-are-things-just-moving

Sure, it means we now have several (current) threads with "expansion" in their title. That's going to happen.


BAUT has always had a very narrow focus to threads; they do not become free-form general discussion (even if the participants think it's all the same subject).

pzkpfw
2011-Feb-12, 11:38 PM
... Just asking of you all... To consider using the 'Astronomy' Thread for these discussions of detail of word meanings...
When it looks like the 'Question', was answered long ago...

That's actually a new policy implemented a few Months back. The mods actively split/move threads to "astronomy" when they get "too deep" (a few members complained loudly about that, perhaps feeling it was "dumbing down" the Q&A forum). It doesn't always happen, as there's some subjectivity involved (what's "too deep") and the thread needs to stay in it's original Q&A home for a while so the original questioner gets a chance to see the answers so far.

astromark
2011-Feb-12, 11:59 PM
Thanks...understood and fine...

astromark
2011-Mar-01, 09:51 PM
Peterscreak has Upset me and handed me a infraction... and have no idea why... If I have spoiled a discussion in ANY way then yes and fine...That is not so.. Withdrawing myself for fear of ANGRY outburst... I obviously do not understand.

pzkpfw
2011-Mar-01, 10:13 PM
Peterscreak has Upset me and handed me a infraction... and have no idea why... If I have spoiled a discussion in ANY way then yes and fine...That is not so.. Withdrawing myself for fear of ANGRY outburst... I obviously do not understand.

1. Do not dispute moderator actions in-thread. Use a PM or report.

2. Do not post off topic. This thread is one you started, but it's about a different thing.

Having said that, the original question was answered, so thread closed.