Forum
Comments:
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 06:54:42 AM UTC
Yes, I definitely agree, but
Yes, I definitely agree, but I don't see it as much of a recurring problem here on this board, most old topics after the first page stay out of the first page. I don't know, it's just common sense keeping everything fine at the moment. If it becomes more of a problem we should invest in a sticky thread or a little box.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:11:05 AM UTC
Sticky or wiki..?
Delan Azabani: "If it becomes more of a problem we should invest in a sticky thread or a little box."
The most recurring topics could be covered by 'stickies'.
But why not a 'wiki' instead? I think in the long run,
that could be much more efficient... -
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:36:38 AM UTC
No... I meant a sticky or
No... I meant a sticky or box reminding users not to bump.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:06:07 AM UTC
Read only..?
I guess that some old threads sometimes comes back to life, because someone looked in vain at the new threads, and then searched the forum and found an old thread that matched the problem. And then we'll get "Return of the Thread"...
However, the alternative is to create a new thread, even if old ones already exists.
In that case, I guess people would complain about duplicate threads.
That's also a potential problem, just as real as the other...I don't think 'reanimation' or 'duplication' of threads by itself is problematic.
But it may be, if overdone...In both cases it's hard to formulate a simple rule,
that's not too 'black/white' in a world of gray zones.
Instead of a rule I'll suggest a more flexible advice:Think! Before you type...
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 01:01:42 PM UTC
Keeps giving
The thread that "keeps giving" is that one about "What antivirus do you use?"
It should just about be petered out now because I think just about every legitimate antivrus there is has been mentioned. Nevertheless, for some reason people find it compelling to tell others what they use, especially noobs.
Whenever I see it pop up, I think to myself "Oh no, not again". The substantive value of that thread has long since been exhausted. I wouldn't mind if it disappeared, but I guess it has some value to some people.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 01:16:36 PM UTC
Another one . . .
I just saw another one about Registry Booster. Interestingly, it was started by the now gone YoKenny.
Besides looking at a profile, you can tell it's a noob when they respond to someone that has been long gone.
However, noobs are good for WOT. It's just that they don't have the "institutional memory" of members that have been around. Stating the obvious there, but I think that's one of the reasons they resurrect old threads. To some of us that's old stuff, but to others it's a brand new discussion.
Perhaps a section specifically dedicated to "new members" (have no idea what the threshold would be) would remedy the situation.
-
- on Mon 07 Sep 2009
- 03:38:07 PM UTC
join date
If I just installed WOT and created a Forum login account today, then every post is new to me. Time is relative and so are post dates.
Many times a topic may have been discussed but is rediscussed because the person posting the question failed to search for it. However, if a topic already exists why not post to it's thread instead of creating a new one? An example would be a recent "old" post I posted in concerning ripway.com - I didn't see a reason to create a new thread about the same site.
As for the common rule on most boards idea...
Most boards that do not want a thread available for discussion, locks them to disable replies. Any BBS making up a rule - "do not post to topics older than [some given date]" are run by amatures.As for a WOT Wiki...
This has been discussed and maybe some of the old posts should be brought "back to life" showing more support for the idea.
WOT Google Group 2.0 is here!
WOT Wiki on WOT website
more search resultsThere is a wiki setup at mywot.wikia.com
though this is more like a sales marketing brochure than a technical / informational wiki. Also, it is not referenced or linked on mywot.com as "official" neither in the menu bar, nor on the homepage.[Edit]
sometimes bringing up an older topic saves from having to re-explain everything all over again.
-------
Against Intuition - gives us safety through Web of Trust.
WOT Community - gives us security through unity.
Thank you all
- G7W -
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 06:54:58 PM UTC
Re: phpBB, vB
I'm not sure I follow, what's the difference between a forum and a message board?
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:01:08 PM UTC
Addressed?
I think Sami addressed that one time. Can't remember what the precise answer was, but my recollection is that the staff intends to stay with what is essentially a Drupal blog design.
Likewise "not complaining". Indeed, the WOT folks have been very responsive where they've seen a need.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:07:00 PM UTC
Re: Addressed?
what is essentially a Drupal blog design
We use the forum module, which I believe is also used on drupal.org.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:09:25 PM UTC
RE: Difference
Thanks BobJam. :)
The Wiki page shows what I consider a forum to be and the WOT forums are like a message board (* to me).
Message board - Every post is on the main page like here at WOT.
Forum - Separate forums within the main forum. You have to enter each sub forum to see the content/posts.
Again, no complaints. Just thought I would throw it out there.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:16:00 PM UTC
RE: Difference
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:37:26 PM UTC
RE: Difference
Maybe if we ever get busier and new posts are being pushed onto page two, in a short period of time, then the category view might be a better option. But for now what we have works fine.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:11:46 PM UTC
Back on topic
If people are coming into a conversation/topic from Google searches they might not realize that the topic is on page 10. Likely just honest mistakes.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 07:53:11 PM UTC
So...
Everyone except Delan Azabani would rather NOT have a rule to bump old thread?
I have to say I am very suprised there!I just think something that has been talked about in the past, should not be brought back now. Because most likely, whatever the bump is will not add much to the conversation.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 08:38:22 PM UTC
Not a big deal
It's not a big deal to me one way or the other.
And, yes, most of the time (but NOT all) a bumped post will "not add much to the conversation", but neither does "rated and commented", which you see a lot. . . so should there be a "rule" for that too?
Seriously, if you're looking for substantive conversations, then "rated and commented" falls in the same category as bumped posts with no substance. What's the big deal?
And actually, for a noob a comment to an old thread IS substantive. I think g7w put that aspect well.
-
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 08:52:14 PM UTC
I fail to see
Why it is "Not a big deal" so you are meaning to tell me, that if some noob bumps all the oldest threads on this forum it wouldn't bother you??
You will just sift through the threads from now, and the ones from '06? Because THAT, is what you are saying...
BTW, I'm not trying to sound rude.
-
- on Mon 07 Sep 2009
- 08:10:44 AM UTC
Tolerance level
"Why it is "Not a big deal" so you are meaning to tell me, that if some noob bumps all the oldest threads on this forum it wouldn't bother you??"
First of all, I think it would be highly unlikely that someone would bump "ALL" the old threads, as you said. Some, yes, but "ALL, no. I mean, really, it doesn't happen every day either.Is it annoying? Of course it is. But in the scheme of things, these arthritic old bones are more bothersome then an occasional bumped old thread. (As far that goes, a buzzing bug around my head is more bothersome.) If I can handle chronic pain, I would consider this a minor annoyance. That's what I mean by "No big deal".
You're right though . . . in my youth I would have been much less tolerant.
So I guess it has to do with tolerance levels, and what you're accustomed to.
"You will just sift through the threads from now, and the ones from '06? Because THAT, is what you are saying..."
I already sift through the "rated and commented" threads, and they're much more abundant than bumped threads from '06.And Athlonite makes a good point about old threads being available to noobs (similar to g7w's point) for questions.
"BTW, I'm not trying to sound rude."
Appreciate that. Neither am I. Interesting debate. -
- on Mon 07 Sep 2009
- 05:43:09 PM UTC
-
BobJam: so should there be a "rule" for that too?
That's a good point (if I undestood you correctly) - too many rules aren't any good at all. E.g., what would happen if one breaks them?...
At some stage, this is going nowhere in my opinion.
--
Per aspera ad astra -
- on Sun 06 Sep 2009
- 08:52:58 PM UTC
I like this one too !!
PCWorld just changed over to the Forum - SubForum format and just can't get used to it. I really like the way this is set up. You get to see right away which threads are new and who has responded to it with out having to click on all of these sub-forums.
As for old threads , they should remain active for the simple reason that if someone needs info. on whatever , they can still search for it And ask questions if they haven't found the appropriate answer in that thread as long as it pertains to the same subject.
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
-
- on Mon 14 Mar 2011
- 03:25:08 AM UTC
RE: Can we get a rule...
It would solve the problem if there would just be topic locks on all posts that reach a certain age, or becomes inactive.
"Bri" for short. Surf safely.
Can we get a rule...
To not bump old board threads?
It seems like people are bumping threads months and months old!
I mean, it's a common rule on most boards.