What's with the limit?

[WillJ]

In the Colosseum forums, when a thread gets past 300 posts, it is closed, and if someone desires, a continuation thread can be made. My question is: Why?

Either someone will feel the obligation to read the past thread before reading the new one, or would not feel the obligation to read much of the thread at all if it were continued instead of a new thread being created. Also, it is not any easier or harder to read two threads of 100 posts each than one thread of 200 posts, and therefore it isn't because of moderators wanting less work. Also, it's only in Colosseum forums; nowhere else, AFAIK. Of course it isn't because of the thread getting too boring, since a new one is allowed. It's definetly not because people don't want things repeated, because more points would be repeated with this current system than if the same thread is kept. Also, TF once said that a post requires the same amount of space as a new thread.

Now that I've unnecessarily ruled out of all the possibilities that I can think of, I ask again: Why?

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

I belive it is because it is easier for the system to keep track of smaller threads than larger ones.

 

[spycatcher34]

There used to be some nug that occured when a thread got over 300 replies but I belevie it was fixed. Also I think it is easier to manage and navigate sub-300 replies. And anyhow it doesnt really hurt anything by closing them at 300

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by Duke of Marlbrough
I belive it is because it is easier for the system to keep track of smaller threads than larger ones.

Hmm, do you know why?

Originally posted by spycatcher34
There used to be some nug that occured when a thread got over 300 replies but I belevie it was fixed. Also I think it is easier to manage and navigate sub-300 replies. And anyhow it doesnt really hurt anything by closing them at 300

So if it has been fixed, do you think it's because it is easier to manage/navigate sub-300 replies? I disagree, BTW. Also, it doesn't explain why it's just the Colosseum forums. And yes, you're right about your last point.

 

[Perfection]

It's just OT, other colluseum ones can last longer

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by Perfection
It's just OT, other colluseum ones can last longer

The mods, and everyone else, always say that it's the Colosseum, not OT. For example, when AoA closed the Creation/Evolution thread:

The colloseum limit on threads is 300, please feel free to continue this topic in a new thread.

Of course, maybe in practice it's only OT.

Edit: Yeah, I see that some threads are longer than 300 in the H&J forum. Hmm, strange...

 

[Thunderfall]

There is no limit on # of posts for a thread. It's just that the OT mods prefer to keep the threads in OT forum to around 300 posts, and I'm ok with that. That's all.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

Besides, once a problem occurs and people start referencing posts on different pages of 25 page threads and why different people deserve moderation it becomes a very ugly business to sort through. This way the threads are manageable and those just joining won't need to read a few hundred posts to get into the discussion, they can just read on from the beginning and if they want, they can choose to go back and read.

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by gonzo_for_civ
Besides, once a problem occurs and people start referencing posts on different pages of 25 page threads and why different people deserve moderation it becomes a very ugly business to sort through. This way the threads are manageable and those just joining won't need to read a few hundred posts to get into the discussion, they can just read on from the beginning and if they want, they can choose to go back and read.

I don't see how it's easier to look through two threads than one thread twice as long, but oh well. Also, I don't think anyone would feel the responsibility to read through a hundred posts. Also, why don't other mods in the other forums do this? Are they more like me on my take of this, or is it that other forums require less moderation?

Originally posted by Thunderfall
There is no limit on # of posts for a thread. It's just that the OT mods prefer to keep the threads in OT forum to around 300 posts, and I'm ok with that. That's all.

Okay, not a big deal anyway.

 

[WildFire]

Just wondering why, but the Riddles thread has eclipsed 900 posts. And its in the colosseum isnt it?

 

[Stapel]

only in OT

 

[Padma]

Actually, very few threads actually make it to 300 posts. And those that do have usually descended into recycling the same arguments over and over at best, and at worst, are nothing but thinly disguised spam. By cutting them off at 300, they can sink out of sight. For a topic that is still generating interest, you simply start a new thread and keep going. If it's a really interesting topic, the thread starter will often include a link to the previous thread in his first post.

BTW: IMO, OT requires close moderation. The only other forum that needs watched as closely is the Civ3 "jungle", but its problems are different. A 300-post limit wouldn't be as useful there.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

YOU try finding flames in trolls in 20 pages!

I also find they few people will read so many posts, so 300 serves well as a cut-off.

1,000+ posts may look good, but it's a mutha to read and moderate.

 

[Octavian X]

If you think 300 posts is a lot, stay out of the Demogame RPG.

I think the Rebel Pub thread hit 1000 posts a little while ago...

 

[Micaelis Rex]

Originally posted by Octavian X
If you think 300 posts is a lot, stay out of the Demogame RPG.

I think the Rebel Pub thread hit 1000 posts a little while ago...

That is nothing, the DYP thread is at 2441!

 

[Dell19]

Plus If there are 30 posts to a page then with 300 posts almost every page can be reached from the OT main page so you don't have to click on page 8 to get to page 15 if you want to read it but its not the last page...

 

[hbdragon88]

The most popular threads can burn the limit pretty fast, like the creation and evolution that just lasted a day before it hit the limit. It becomes quite a sticky business to find what people are arguing about - picking up from where they left off in the other thread.

I have no compliant about it, but it can get a bit odd when, like today, Lefty just opened up a "war thread 3" thread.