Thread to Report Issues with new xenForo version 2.2: "Similar Threads"

[Valka D'Ur]

Has there been any internal study about effectiveness depending on thread tags? OT threads rarely use them, or they use them for jokes.

I guess a more general question is how similarity is weighed.

I would guess that most people don't bother with tags. I usually do if it's my turn to be the OP of a serial thread, and I've used them a few other times. I try to make them serious, or at least if I use a joke, it still has something to do with the topic of the thread.

Tags can sometimes make all the difference in finding threads. Thank goodness most people at TrekBBS used them when they were the OP of the avatar contests in one of the subforums. Years later I asked for a master list of themes for these contests to help keep people from duplicating them, so one of the mods there helped me find as many old threads as possible to compile a master list (there wasn't one before). We had to dig back years, but finally found them. I compiled the list and it is still being used and updated.

EDIT: One of the "similar" threads up for me now is "Identifying Lost Mods". Well... I can think of quite a few who vanished and we haven't seen them in years...

 

[The_J]

TF has tweaked some of the settings, they *might* be more useful now, TBD.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

TF has tweaked some of the settings, they *might* be more useful now, TBD.

I see larger numbers in the Unread Messages/Alerts.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

I'm seeing the numbers at all, which is new.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

I must admit, I really am enjoying the "Similar Threads" feature now.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Three of the suggestions are actually relevant this time.

 

[Elephantium]

I still find it inconvenient. It makes paging in SG threads a bit worse. The suggestions haven't seemed helpful for me, either

It would be nice to have a user-level setting to hide/show suggestions. Maybe in Xenforo v2.3?

 

[Lexicus]

Not an issue per se but "similar threads" should either be tweaked so as not to display threads that would be "necro'd" if one replied to them, or the rule against necro'ing threads should be relaxed.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

or the rule against necro'ing threads should be relaxed.

There is so little even potential problem from necro'ing a thread i've never understood the angst with it. I think its fun, and often interesting.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

It can be interesting, but also frustrating to reply to someone who made an old post and not realize that person may not be around anymore.

And if it's a really old thread, the earlier posts may have been moderated to a different standard than the more recent ones. This can result in confusion if people see posts that by current standards wouldn't be allowed.

 

[Quintillus]

I disagree with the idea that having old threads in "Similar Threads" is a bad thing. Rather - with a focus on the Civ forums - that's been one of the areas I've found "Similar Threads" to be most useful.

Found a thread on a topic about an esoteric part of Civ III or IV but it didn't really answer the question? Sometimes one of the Similar Threads does answer that question. Or if none of them found a great answer, but you have found a way to solve a problem, post about it so the next person with the same question (but without an answer) can find the answer to their problem.

Necroing with useful information can reduce the problem illustrated by this XKCD comic (source: https://xkcd.com/979/):

I'll also note that as far as I'm aware, including after re-reviewing the rules just now, there is no prohibition against necro'ing threads. There is a prohibition against spam, which is defined as "posting something that does not make a significant contribution to the discussion at hand", and necroing can be a form of spam. But if you necro a thread that you found via Similar Threads and are making a useful contribution to that, I am not aware of a reason that would be an infraction.

 

[Lexicus]

I'll also note that as far as I'm aware, including after re-reviewing the rules just now, there is no prohibition against necro'ing threads. There is a prohibition against spam, which is defined as "posting something that does not make a significant contribution to the discussion at hand", and necroing can be a form of spam. But if you necro a thread that you found via Similar Threads and are making a useful contribution to that, I am not aware of a reason that would be an infraction.

What prompted me to post this was @Crezth found a thread about bombing Yemen from like 2015 through Similar Threads and posted in it, and that thread was then instantly locked. Not an infraction, but I didn't really see a reason to lock the thread.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

While not a written rule, in my experience is that the current culture is to lock and invite a new thread to be made.

It avoids the potential issues Val mentions. Does avoid fun imo. But I'm a bit silly.

 

[The_J]

Not an issue per se but "similar threads" should either be tweaked so as not to display threads that would be "necro'd" if one replied to them, or the rule against necro'ing threads should be relaxed.

We're not giving out any warnings for this at the moment (this is not a permission for anyone to go grave digging right now though), so it's not that much of a problem.

We can add a limit for the similar threads though. Xenforo doesn't seem to be used to very old forums, so the options they have is to limit it to threads not older than 7 days, 14 days, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months or 1 year.
( make that years for us please)

We could try with 1 year?
(would need to discuss this internally too though)

There is so little even potential problem from necro'ing a thread i've never understood the angst with it. I think its fun, and often interesting.

Most likely no good discussion will arise from this though, as the OP is most often not there anymore, and most of the information could be outdated.

 

[leif erikson]

Most likely no good discussion will arise from this though, as the OP is most often not there anymore, and most of the information could be outdated.

This is true in the game threads given STEAM updates, DLC and hot fixes can be provided at any time and change the game mechanics.

 

[Broken_Erika]

There are some thread in the Civ2 forum that can go quite some time without being updated, but are like repositories for graphics and maps and stuff. Those would be an obvious an exception.

 

[Patine]

There are some thread in the Civ2 forum that can go quite some time without being updated, but are like repositories for graphics and maps and stuff. Those would be an obvious an exception.

Indeed, and Civ2 is not relevantly affected by STEAM updates, DLC's, or hotfixes. They didn't have such things when MPS (not yet Firaxis or Take 2) slapped it down in the late '90's, early 2000's (save one official patch for FW/MGE and one for ToT, and the Time Threat Paradox patch (the closest thing to a DLC)). Makes me feel old...

 

[Zegangani]

I noticed that CFC now doesn't remember the Threads you visited and the ones you didn't as much as before Xenforo. The only Threads it remembers are in the first Page of a Sub Forum, sometimes even only half the Threads on the 1st Page. That's very annoying, bc there are so many Threads that I go back to read sometimes, bc I don't visit them regularly. But now I have no Idea which Page of a Thread I read through last, and what the last Post I read was. Before Xenforo, that would only happen for very Old Threads, that you won't encounter till Page 7-10. That's a shame. I wish you Guys can find a Solution to this.

I do understand why the change to Xenforo was necessary, but I cant help but realize how much better the old CFC Version was, in nearly every aspect.

 

[The_J]

After 30 days all threads are marked as "read".
This number could be set higher, but would mean that old forums without any new threads will show up as unread. I'm not sure if there's a sweet spot in the middle which satisfies everyone.

 

[Zegangani]

After 30 days all threads are marked as "read".
This number could be set higher, but would mean that old forums without any new threads will show up as unread. I'm not sure if there's a sweet spot in the middle which satisfies everyone.

30 Days seems to be a very low time for a Thread in a Forum IMHO (especially now that there isn't much talk anyway with no Civ New/Content). I understand that with older Threads, but aren't older Threads, the ones "years" old? I would love it to be higher than 30 days, ideally 6 Months or higher (half a Year seems like a sweet spot for me), but I also would understand it if you don't want to up the Time too much. Anyway, Thanks for the Info, and all your great work here as Moderators!

EDIT: isn't there a way to make that customizable on a user-basis? Like an Option in the Settings to mark Threads older than X months as read. if unchecked it doesn't do that. bc that would be neat.