OT Thread Post Limit?

[Sultan Bhargash]

Is it still 300?

If so, why? - it seems to me that it would be easier to leave the perpetual evolutionism debate in one place where we can ignore it...

If not, what brought about the change?

 

[Turner]

300, as I'm sure you're aware Mr. 7000-Posts, (congrats, btw) is so that people on dialup don't have to wait so long to get the pages downloaded. I know the F&E went over, I actually thought that was going to be the exception to the rule. Guess not.

It's kinda nice having the older stuff purged off. Sure, there are two threads up there, but not for long. The other one drops off soon enough.

Consider it archiving.

 

[Thunderfall]

The problem with some OT threads is that they could go on indefinitely if you don't put an artificial cap somewhere. Game threads, babe threads, etc fall into this category. So a cap is necessary, though may not for all OT threads.

It really depends on the OT mods' perference, since thread length doesn't affect forum performance in anyway.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by Sultan Bhargash
If so, why? - it seems to me that it would be easier to leave the perpetual evolutionism debate in one place where we can ignore it...

Oh, just upholding tradition that's all.

But it really was getting too long - 420-something.

 

[Octavian X]

Tell that to those NES players and their 4000 post-long thread.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

I havetechnical questions. Does thread length affected loading time or bandwidth? Or is it only the posts per page, as I suspect?

Are there any technical consequenses to long threads?

 

[Thunderfall]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
I havetechnical questions. Does thread length affected loading time or bandwidth? Or is it only the posts per page, as I suspect?

Are there any technical consequenses to long threads?

I asked the vB people about this a long time ago and they said no. That's one nice thing about a forum driven by database. The flat file UBB forum can't handle long threads well.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

That means from both ends, sever and user, yes?
The other reason to thread lenght limits was one of AoA's moderating techniques. Thus I see no remaining reason for thread lenth limits unless one of the other moderators likes to review threads from beggining to end to get a full imprression of how a problem may have developed. I will therfore also reccoment removal of leght limits.

 

[Toasty]

Originally posted by Octavian X
Tell that to those NES players and their 4000 post-long thread.

Most successful NESs run upwards of 500 posts, RTOR2 went on for a lot longer than it should've...

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by Turner_727
300 ... is so that people on dialup don't have to wait so long to get the pages downloaded.

That doesn't make any sense. As TF has kinda already explained, you only open one page at a time; it doesn't take any longer to read all the posts of a 3000-post thread than to read all the posts of 10 300-post threads.

I personally think capping threads at 300 posts is a little silly, but others prefer multiple nice, short threads rather than a really long one. And closing threads after a certain limit and opening new ones certainly doesn't hurt anything (a new thread takes up no more server space than a new post).

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Well, since no some seems to have any real reason to have a limit, I say would say ther is no longer such limit.

 

[Turner]

Originally posted by WillJ
That doesn't make any sense. As TF has kinda already explained, you only open one page at a time; it doesn't take any longer to read all the posts of a 3000-post thread than to read all the posts of 10 300-post threads.

I personally think capping threads at 300 posts is a little silly, but others prefer multiple nice, short threads rather than a really long one. And closing threads after a certain limit and opening new ones certainly doesn't hurt anything (a new thread takes up no more server space than a new post).

Just spouting the company line! That was the official reason before, so. . .

I would guess that the easy way for fast page loads on dial up would be to set your pref to 5 post per page. But it would take a while to wade through all that. . . .

 

[Perfection]

if you do that, could you do one thing, make it so instead of on the forum screen:
Page 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,last
you have 1,2,3,4,5...12,13,14,15
that way people with crappy dailup don't have to load a thread then shift back.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

Yay! No Limit! Badboy productions!!!

 

[Immortal]

Leafty four fucher refetrance:

Pleze spel teh werd "unlimited" corekt in the nesct anuncement u maek

 

[WillJ]

When will the Word Association thread be deleted? After 300 posts?

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by WillJ
When will the Word Association thread be deleted? After 300 posts?

When you least expect it.

 

[Jeratain]

Personally I found it a bit more refreshing to having a new thread started rather than having to browse through 50 pages of a thread in order to find a post I was looking for. It's mainly a feeling of organization from my behalf. OTOH I do understand it's easier to have just one thread dedicated to a topic without closing it at a certain post count... Oh well.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Immortal
Leafty four fucher refetrance:

Pleze spel teh werd "unlimited" corekt in the nesct anuncement u maek

Heel noo, sphelin notzy!

 

[Immortal]

I expected as much from the cyborg moderator extraordinaire!