Y'know, it's possible it was locked because they want each question to have a different subject, that way it's easier to search the forum answers--dumping all the questions into one thread makes it harder to use the forums to find information.

(In any event, I wouldn't start a new thread until finding out why the old one was closed).

In the absence of any explanation, do nothing?

Seems impractical.

I'm just advocating some caution. The closing of the thread without an explanation why is a bit weird and I'd advocate caution over doing just doing something to do it.

Plus, I think the more recent trend of stuffing everything into 5-6 threads instead of separating them by subject is bad for the forum. If the trend continues, Lusternia should just switch to like having a Facebook page instead of a forum, since the whole purpose of the way forums are structured is to separate different topics by threads. Quotes and the specific threads the admins pin are a good idea, but when you have general purpose threads with no coherency like "Tweets" (which, at the beginning, was supposed to be haiku like communications rather than the "misc" category), it's removing the basic feature of why message forums were created, and encouraging people to be lazy and/or making it harder for the admin when people turn a pinned subject into a multi-page rant hijack.

I have to wonder if the Facebook/Twitter trend is rewiring the way people communicate and that's why fewer people bother to create subjects. I think the whole point of forum software is small threads over time over many subjects, which is why we moved to forums over mailing lists so long ago.

Uh, I'm pretty sure it's just the usual, "this thread has hit critical mass, bring on the new one!" sort of deal.

Why create 100 threads that will only have one answer (or rather, only need one post after the initial first). It seems to me this way (simple questions thread) is a way of just not having 100s of threads that do not take such to answer.

The problem is that a new person can search by subject and find interesting things.

I am a little fascinated by this trend to stuff everything into long threads. When I came back from inactivity, even though I would occasionally glance through the forums, I wanted to take some time and read and see how people reacted to changes, but it was harder to find that because a lot of discussion was stuffed into a single thread. I think we used the software as intended, it would make it easier for newbies to find stuff based on searches as well as people finding past discussions via a search. (Plus, I think putting everything into a long thread makes it harder on the database itself). In short, it makes things harder to archive in a coherent matter.

I just occasionally bring this up because there's definitely a change in the way people use the forums, and since I was here since 2005, I can see it. I can't see why people would choose this method, especially since we create subfolders and filters in e-mails and a lot of people complain about the constant "stream" Facebook and Twitter have (so much that they are implementing ways to filter/organize themselves). I just wonder if it's a generational thing.

I know you occasionally bring it up. I object every time. Personally, I feel that it works a lot better this way, especially if all you want to do is a quick throwaway question / comment. What's the point of making a new thread for it? Having to do that just places a higher disincentive on it (and encourages more of that kind of thing on Facebook / other groups), and further, having a billion new threads is far more daunting than one thread that can just be ignored or skimmed over if you want.

I am also fond of using the search tool to look for something that I vaguely remember, as evidenced by how often I will go back and quote things from the past. Searching in that way doesn't care if it's all consolidated in one thread!

My question: Why is Simple Questions still pinned, while this is not yet?

I've mentioned it, like, 2 or 3 times total.



The only problem I find is browsing, if you don't know what you are searching for, and you just wanted to go back in time. I think if you specifically know what you are looking for it's cool, but for general browsing it stinks. But I guess it depends on the forums. I notice a tendency, for instance, on the Bioware forums to stick things all in one thread, but other forums encourage. It's not a huge issue, it's just a curiosity. (At least you explained your own preference).



We still don't know the purpose of closing the old thread yet.

There's an option where it shows relevant posts.

Instead of.. threads.

Quick forum search shows me 4 distinct instances.
1) "Ban Lack of Rants"
2) Tweets 3 (February)
3) Tweets 3 again (April, something like that)
4) Here!

Each time engaging in a discussion with me. (Which is why I remember them, honestly)

PS: All I did for that search was search for "Phred" saying "Thread," and only showing relevant posts. There were only 4 pages of results to check through, all the ones I care about were newer (though I did look through the rest, because I like to do that for the sake of remembering old conversations!). The forum search really does work well if you don't use the default parameters, imo. The thing that bothers me the most is flood control.

Xenthos's post made me lol from the irony.

To be fair, I got the 3 right--Ban lack of Rants was back in 2007 , and that time I was arguing that particular thread for a different reason--having a subject that encouraged "venting" I felt did more harm than good.

(And IRE ended up backing me up in the long run on that subject, as all Rants forums have been removed, and the only one now left is "non-game" ranting).

That said, I have to agree that it wasn't the focus of the overall discussion.

And... this is something that would do a whole lot better in another thread at this point. *cough* Definitely not a short question!

I think the key thing is to find out why the thread got locked in the first place before restarting it, because for all I know they might agree with my opinion/theory when it comes to "questions". (Usually there's an explanation when this happens--or at least it's easy to see when it is a rant).

Eventru? Estarra?

(And to be clear, I'm just advocating caution--this could be a misunderstanding, or an accident, but I don't think it wise to assume anything).

If anything, this is not a discussion for this thread. Going by your own logic, Phred, you should have made a new thread titled "Why is there a new short questions thread?" and raised your concerns there instead of cluttering up this thread in the very same way you are taking offense with.

Also, it may be your common sense that people use the search function, but in actual fact, the people who come to ask inane, short questions usually don't. They don't bother to search for previous threads made about the same question they are asking, and just make a new one. Imagine a new thread asking "What is the nut that is dropped by the Master Ravenwood tree for?" every week. Now try using the search function after a few months of that. I wish you luck in finding what you're looking for.

Not only does it clutter up the forum, make the forum goers unwilling to answer such threads (and instead all posting variations of USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION! replies) it also renders searching via relevant thread results (and also relevant posts) a hellish experience.

Short questions and simple question thread consolidations are the natural, logical evolution of the current forum environment. To raise objections to it is counter productive to the creation of a healthy forum environment. The "trend", as you call it, of consolidating things into huge threads is a "trend" only because it is the natural answer to various problems, not because it is a fad that should be curbed.

What can I say, I am a product of the enviroment, I guess. But if you think I "took offense", you misunderstood my tone, which is one of perplexed bemusement of the general trend, not a "condemnation".

I have no problem with simple questions, and no one's replying when I ask if the simple questions 2 thread was closed on purpose or if someone clicked the lock button by accident (this has happened before, it's hard to notice when you've done it), so I'ma swap the new one in for the other one. I must strongly protest that tweets is a wholly different matter and should have new threads made for a good half of its subject matter (just because it's the "natural solution" doesn't mean it's not a detriment, Lerad!)