Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by hobbsyoyo, Jan 22, 2020.
There have been some very well-written posts in the serial threads, and the only reason they're there instead of in a dedicated thread is because the dedicated thread doesn't exist.
Frankly, it's insulting to be told that a post I worked on for over an hour (if research was necessary or I wanted to be careful to get the nuances just right) is just spam and not worth being counted.
Could you elaborate as to why you (or other mods) chose not to archive the serialized political threads?
So that they can still feature in OT searches and because they were only really serialised to stop them getting too long and unwieldy. There was no particular pattern behind it.
Ok so the rants and raves threads are also cut off to get them from getting too long and unwieldy so they have that in common.
I did not know that searches did not go through archived threads! This is actually annoying because I do go and search old posts (I just dug up some threads on the FCC from 2-4 years ago for reference) and it's not like I don't care or will never reference what I wrote in raves and rants threads after having written them. This goes back to these threads being mistakenly thought of as collections of spam. They're not!
And if they are serialized to cut off their length but they still have searchable value, then they should be treated the same as the political threads and not archived/postcount deleted.
Why did I look up old FCC threads? Because I was talking about my antenna in a serialized thread (television shows). Now I'm wondering if I was unable to find relevant results from other serialized threads where I've talked about the antenna because the threads were archived. I.E. the stuff in serialized threads is not spam. I can't think of any way to categorize discussion of FCC regulations as spam, other than that it didn't belong in its own dedicated thread.
Are the TV and movie threads archived?
You can still search through archived threads, you just need to include that forum in your search. So OT + Archives.
Music, TV, Cool Pictures etc., yes. They're all archived because that's just the way it's always been done.
Well for the last few years, letting us keep our postcount for serial threads was just what was done. Should we define how long something has to be done a certain way for it to be normal or tradition?
That's not really how tradition works. It's also not up to me to decide that.
I think a deciding factor in what is tradition is the passage of time. Had we made it five more years with intact postcount, would we not consider that the tradition? And that we didn't make it that long shows there's an underlying arbitrariness at play and thus the safe bet is to give us back our postcount.
Another way of assessing the value of postcount is if it will upset more people if it is given back or more if it is taken away?
Also I'm not really talking solely to you, I hope the other moderators and admins follow posts here.
Ah, yes. The "TRADITION!!!!!" excuse. That's why so many years went by with the Comings & Goings thread not being stickied, so new people didn't know it existed (as it was usually nowhere near the top of the list of OT threads). Then the new people would post an introductory thread ("Hi, I'm new here...") and would promptly get chewed out by staff for making a "personal thread."
Finally, I decided (after numerous requests from some members, explaining this problem to me and agreeing that it's not fair to people to berate them for not using a thread they didn't know existed) to just sticky the thing and see what happened. That was almost 10 years ago, and it's been a useful, positive change to OT. New people know where to say hello, people can say (hopefully temporary) goodbyes, and while there were some instances where an actual conversation broke out, that was recently solved with the "Conversations" thread.
Citing "Tradition!" as an excuse when there's no real reason for it anymore is just not cool. What actual harm does it do to CFC if we get post count for archived threads? Isn't it better to get more accurate data of how much activity has really happened here?
You're attacking the wrong person. I didn't make this decision and I can't undo it. Hobbsyoyo asked me a question and I answered it.
I am not "attacking" you. You were not on staff at the same time I was, and you had no part of my being told "because it's tradition" when I proposed minor and useful changes and was shot down.
But it is annoying to see you perpetuate the excuse, even though you had no part in the actual decision.
He's not perpetuating it, he's explaining it.
When you've heard it for over a decade, it's beyond any sensible explanation. Arakhor isn't the problem here, and I'm on your side of this issue.
TIL...spamming posts in serial threads is viewed as a "strategy."
Tomorrow I hope to learn what frickin' game people think is being played there.
Seriously, has anyone ever cared how many posts I have, or how much of a spam slammer I must be to have them?
I think maybe the spamming strategy refers to the end of threads when people do play a game of musical chairs for about 10 posts. I will conceded that can be spammy, but it's not fair to characterize the entire thread that way. In fact, given that there is a bit of ritual and theatrics involved in the musical posts game, you could say this is evidence of a unique culture in OT and therefore the serial threads as a whole are not spam.
Yeah, maybe 10 spammy posts at the end vs the 1000 in the thread. Oh the Horror.
There's probably more spam posts in this thread.
Why is this even being discussed?
I've been to a lot of different sites and honestly I don't think spam is an issue here.
Yep. I had a post ready to go, and you beat me to #1000 by about half a second. I deleted it (no point in posting it), but it was definitely not a spammy one.
And you're right - OT does have a unique culture, which some staff members seem generally unfamiliar with if they don't post there. It's the same of any other part of the forum where people don't post. You don't get to know the people or how the normal ebb and flow of conversation normally goes, and so you can overlook the best part of it because you just don't know enough to see it.
Separate names with a comma.