Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:08 a.m. PST |
I don't quite understand the fascination with wanting to only see new topics on the top of the SF, Pulp, Fantasy or whatever board. Now, if that's what people want, then an effort should be made to have Bill change the order the topics come up, to be based on the first and not the last posting date. Then you would still have the recent topics on top, and we can still update older ones without interfering with that. Win-win, if you ask me. Anyway, the day it becomes illegal to update an old thread on TMP (such as a thread that will only show up with "Underworld" as the search) with one that may not be so obvious, but is very relevant, will be the day I have no further use for this forum, as it would only be for those with very short-term memory. Why have someone later have to struggle to figure out three or four searches, when the topics are closely related, and could be cross-referenced? Most news websites have tags on older topics, linking them to more recent ones. I think it cuts back on many people (particularly new members) asking questions they don't know have been asked before. And may also get people to think "out of the box", as many people get tunnel vision when playing a specific genre. Some call it necromancy, I simply consider it a helpful update and cross-reference. What do you say? Would you call it "necromancy" or "updates and cross-reference"? CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 8:10 a.m. PST |
|
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:13 a.m. PST |
Example of an older thread that has been updated and cross-referenced to other relevant threads: TMP link CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 8:20 a.m. PST |
I know how tagging, thread threading and linking works. That link you posted is none of those things, it's just a thread with links to other threads manually pasted in. So just like every other thread on TMP then. |
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:23 a.m. PST |
So, would you consider what I did offensive/irritating and call it "thread necromancy", or would you see it as a helpful update and cross-reference? CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 8:28 a.m. PST |
It's not offensive/irritating, it's not particularly useful either. You still have to use TMP's broken search function, and it won't thread to other threads, and it depends on user input. Which with wargamers, and especially the users of TMP most of whom are Luddites who don't understand the Electric Abacus, is like herding cats |
aecurtis | 22 Jun 2009 8:29 a.m. PST |
I think you missed TVs Frank's point. You frequently seem
very exuberant about your favorite subjects. I can see how it could be perceived as irritating. Allen |
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:30 a.m. PST |
Understood. But, if there was no particular interest in what the thread contains, why read it just because it is at the top, and get annoyed because it simply floated up to the surface (something I don't quite understand in the first place – the reasons for bringing them to the top, that is)? I still think that the order threads show up on boards should be based on the date of the first post, not the last. That way, if someone adds "an update or a cross-reference" it doesn't automatically bring it to the top, right? CC |
aecurtis | 22 Jun 2009 8:33 a.m. PST |
"
it would only be for those with very short-term memory" "You still have to use TMP's broken search function" Odd how this old geezer (meaning me, not CC) manages to combine a faint memory of something being posted before with TMP's "broken search function" in order to point people to where we've had similar discussions before. It ain't broke, and not everything need be repeated in each new discussion. What *would* be helpful is if users did apply a little logic and searched once in a while, instead of asking a question that's been answered a dozen times before. Allen |
aecurtis | 22 Jun 2009 8:34 a.m. PST |
I'll head off with Sancho to the next windmill now
|
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:37 a.m. PST |
LOL. Thanks Don Quix. Good input as always. CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 8:37 a.m. PST |
It ain't broke, and not everything need be repeated in each new discussion. What *would* be helpful is if users did apply a little logic and searched once in a while, instead of asking a question that's been answered a dozen times before. I think I already covered that Which with wargamers, and especially the users of TMP most of whom are Luddites who don't understand the Electric Abacus, is like herding cats True, many forums I use are full of IT geeks who learned C++ at their mother's breast, but I reckon some of TMP's users struggle with turning the damn thing on, typing a message and hitting <submit> |
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:39 a.m. PST |
"some of TMP's users struggle with turning the damn thing on, typing a message and hitting <submit>" That was me! CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 8:40 a.m. PST |
If I can understand it, it must be easy
|
aecurtis | 22 Jun 2009 8:51 a.m. PST |
"True, many forums I use are full of IT geeks who learned C++ at their mother's breast
" As is this forum, if most of the users' claims of employment are to be believed. But as we have discussed elsewhere, for professionals whose livelihood entails accurate coding, they generally do a poor job here of striking the correct keys in the correct sequence! (I learned to write programs for my TRS-80, and that was the end of *my* programming journey!) Allen |
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 8:54 a.m. PST |
Ok, Allen. You are speaking Greek (or is it Geek?) to me again. CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 9:04 a.m. PST |
As is this forum, if most of the users' claims of employment are to be believed. I don't believe that for a minute I've seen some of the dumb-arsed questions asked about computers, the 'net and simple formatting on here. Stuff that the average 8 year old wouldn't need to ask about. No, I don't believe it. |
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 9:10 a.m. PST |
But the average 8 year old grew up with the darn things! CC |
Connard Sage | 22 Jun 2009 9:11 a.m. PST |
I'm in my 50s. Like I said, if I can understand it
|
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 9:17 a.m. PST |
I get it. I get it. I'm a caveman, I know. :) CC |
richarDISNEY | 22 Jun 2009 10:27 a.m. PST |
I like the way it is. Updated threads on top. |
Cacique Caribe | 22 Jun 2009 10:29 a.m. PST |
Even if it means I may annoy a few people out there, who only want recent threads on top? CC |
Wargamer43210 | 22 Jun 2009 10:32 a.m. PST |
I like the way it is. Updated threads on top. Me too. I have limited time and anything that highlights activity works well for me. |
Farstar | 22 Jun 2009 10:35 a.m. PST |
I don't mind the board archives sorting by activity. Lots of boards do that. The one that confuses me is the sorting order when you do an author search
|
Cpt Arexu | 23 Jun 2009 11:19 a.m. PST |
Even if it means I may annoy a few people out there, who only want recent threads on top?CC
I don't mind posting when there's something new to say. You (CC) often post things I didn't even know I was looking for until you mentioned them. I do mind dragging in other threads just to 'bump' up the thread you're posting into. That way lies madness
|