Carlh
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,261
- Name
- Carl
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I dont know if this is worth considering or whether everyone is happy the way things are, but Im just wondering about the following...
When I go on one of my posting sprees, I unfortunately bring those posts all the way back to the top of the forum section, so looks like the database order on threads is last-post, first. In the case of today's post, i've gone in 2 or 3 pages into a thread to reply to some zero-count reply posts.
I think if people post something up, it deserves at least one comment to show someone is interested in what they post. There's nothing worse than seeing 40 or 50 views and no one has bothered to post anything back.
However, I see there's plenty of 0 replies to posts that quickly disappear into oblivion, pages into the section. The most obvious issue with that is, if someone replies to a post that is several days, months or even years old, it brings it right back to the forefront of the thread section, which isn't a bad thing necessarily - but if I go commenting/posting against some threads, I can quickly and very easily push threads off the first page, unintentionally. Plus I then annoy the hell out of someone who has 0 replies and hasn't had a chance to get some comments back (which is probably what happened to the zero-count posts I've gone and posted back against).
I'm lucky that I get to work from home most of the time, others cant get into TP until after working hours, or even worse, people on shifts just get to see a load of older posts, with a load of comments on, that they wont comment against, because they've already had some feedback.
There's nothing intentional about it, (though anyone could, if they wanted to, post someone into oblivion) and in the case of people getting 0 replies to a post which has their hard-work attached, it can be a bit of a moral destroyer.
SO what do you think about changing the sort order of your threads in each section to be <lowest count> first, then by last post date.
That would leave 0 and low count-commented threads a bit more of a chance to get replies to. It would make no difference to posts where plenty of people are commenting (who really wants 20 or 30 replies to a post, there's not much to be gained from posts with more than 6 or 7 replies <really> as they tend to either (1) get repeated (which in the case of critique, becomes an annoyance) or (2) goes completely off topic while unanswered threads just go off the page.
Just my 10 pence worth. Please keep this thread on track, rather than go off on critique stuff, I just want to know what people think about the ordering of threads, regardless of where it stands in the sections (unless particular sections <should> have a different order sequence).
When I go on one of my posting sprees, I unfortunately bring those posts all the way back to the top of the forum section, so looks like the database order on threads is last-post, first. In the case of today's post, i've gone in 2 or 3 pages into a thread to reply to some zero-count reply posts.
I think if people post something up, it deserves at least one comment to show someone is interested in what they post. There's nothing worse than seeing 40 or 50 views and no one has bothered to post anything back.
However, I see there's plenty of 0 replies to posts that quickly disappear into oblivion, pages into the section. The most obvious issue with that is, if someone replies to a post that is several days, months or even years old, it brings it right back to the forefront of the thread section, which isn't a bad thing necessarily - but if I go commenting/posting against some threads, I can quickly and very easily push threads off the first page, unintentionally. Plus I then annoy the hell out of someone who has 0 replies and hasn't had a chance to get some comments back (which is probably what happened to the zero-count posts I've gone and posted back against).
I'm lucky that I get to work from home most of the time, others cant get into TP until after working hours, or even worse, people on shifts just get to see a load of older posts, with a load of comments on, that they wont comment against, because they've already had some feedback.
There's nothing intentional about it, (though anyone could, if they wanted to, post someone into oblivion) and in the case of people getting 0 replies to a post which has their hard-work attached, it can be a bit of a moral destroyer.
SO what do you think about changing the sort order of your threads in each section to be <lowest count> first, then by last post date.
That would leave 0 and low count-commented threads a bit more of a chance to get replies to. It would make no difference to posts where plenty of people are commenting (who really wants 20 or 30 replies to a post, there's not much to be gained from posts with more than 6 or 7 replies <really> as they tend to either (1) get repeated (which in the case of critique, becomes an annoyance) or (2) goes completely off topic while unanswered threads just go off the page.
Just my 10 pence worth. Please keep this thread on track, rather than go off on critique stuff, I just want to know what people think about the ordering of threads, regardless of where it stands in the sections (unless particular sections <should> have a different order sequence).


