Forums > Social Discussion > Initial/ Original Post Updates - Opinions please
Login/Join to ParticipateStargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Do you think it's useful for Threadstarters to update their original posts as the discussion proceeds?
For many it's very hard to dig through xxx pages of posts and I know that some like to use the input, quote posts and browse the links provided.
It's not easy for a thread-starter to keep it updated and this is not meant to be mandatory or anything at all.
Also there is the risk that OP's are keeping a bias according to the posters/ starters opinion....
It's only a thought/suggestion... what do you think?
Do you think it's useful for Threadstarters to update their original posts as the discussion proceeds?
For many it's very hard to dig through xxx pages of posts and I know that some like to use the input, quote posts and browse the links provided.
It's not easy for a thread-starter to keep it updated and this is not meant to be mandatory or anything at all.
Also there is the risk that OP's are keeping a bias according to the posters/ starters opinion....
It's only a thought/suggestion... what do you think?
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
Meh - if a discussion is 4 pages long I think people need to have read them all in order to join in the discussion, whereby they'll pick-up where the discussion has drifted to... It's up to the OP to re-direct any de-railed threads if they want to.
When it gets to 10+ pages long, that's a lot of reading so a new title might be vaguely useful, but people will probably still need to read the last few pages to get the gist of the thread and see what's already been said.
Meh - if a discussion is 4 pages long I think people need to have read them all in order to join in the discussion, whereby they'll pick-up where the discussion has drifted to... It's up to the OP to re-direct any de-railed threads if they want to.
When it gets to 10+ pages long, that's a lot of reading so a new title might be vaguely useful, but people will probably still need to read the last few pages to get the gist of the thread and see what's already been said.
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
compfuzzled
1,182 posts
Location: hastings, England (UK)
compfuzzled
1,182 posts
Location: hastings, England (UK)
Posted:
surely it would confuse the thread of the conversation?
maybe you could add updates to the bottom of the post, but still think it would confuse the situation
surely it would confuse the thread of the conversation?
maybe you could add updates to the bottom of the post, but still think it would confuse the situation
"the geeks have got you" - Gayle
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
No
The whole point of forums like this is to have active conversations, not create some sort of archive ( tech threads exempted, of course ). it's a hard idea to reconcile with the tendency to search for, and bump, old dead threads.
No
The whole point of forums like this is to have active conversations, not create some sort of archive ( tech threads exempted, of course ). it's a hard idea to reconcile with the tendency to search for, and bump, old dead threads.
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
Also no. I think, even if I'd agree with the original idea, it would create more confusion than anything else. By summarising you have to put in a lot of effort and will necessarily quote participants out of context.
Also no. I think, even if I'd agree with the original idea, it would create more confusion than anything else. By summarising you have to put in a lot of effort and will necessarily quote participants out of context.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
No, I like to read the originial post to get the original idea
No, I like to read the originial post to get the original idea
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
i dont care....i usually only read the first post if the thread has been bumped and doesnt have too many replies or its a new thread...any ways i dun care.
i dont care....i usually only read the first post if the thread has been bumped and doesnt have too many replies or its a new thread...any ways i dun care.
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Intersting - thanks for the input. So far it's more leaning into the "no" direction.
I have the impression that those looooong discussions (like the gun thread) are simply too much to follow - hence there are valuable informations for ppl interested in the topic. Which is why I updated the OP.
Same would apply to topics like carbon dioxide or the Bejing Olympics, Iraq or Israel.
Personally I don't mind the effort, if it means that ppl don't feel like "having to dig through 2.368 posts" - in order not to add something that has only been stated on the previous page.
But certainly updates should be clearly marked as such...
Other opinions?
Intersting - thanks for the input. So far it's more leaning into the "no" direction.
I have the impression that those looooong discussions (like the gun thread) are simply too much to follow - hence there are valuable informations for ppl interested in the topic. Which is why I updated the OP.
Same would apply to topics like carbon dioxide or the Bejing Olympics, Iraq or Israel.
Personally I don't mind the effort, if it means that ppl don't feel like "having to dig through 2.368 posts" - in order not to add something that has only been stated on the previous page.
But certainly updates should be clearly marked as such...
Other opinions?
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
As far as I know, the starter of any thread can choose to update the first post, or choose not to.
Which seems fair enough to me.
As to whether they should- I'd say that's also up to them.
When it comes to 30-page threads, newbies wanting to get involved have 2 choices- read all 30 pages, or jump in and risk not knowing every argument put forward.
Again, I'd say that's their choice and I'm OK with that- obviously, either choice has it's disadvantages, but, at the end of the day, that's inevitable when looking at a 30-page thread.
One thing I would say, is that if the thread starter chooses to edit their first post to, in some way, summarise the thread, then, that's fine.
But, it's worth realising that, as they are heavily involved in the long-ongoing thread, I don't think there's that much of a chance that their summation will be particularly unbiased.
As far as I know, the starter of any thread can choose to update the first post, or choose not to.
Which seems fair enough to me.
As to whether they should- I'd say that's also up to them.
When it comes to 30-page threads, newbies wanting to get involved have 2 choices- read all 30 pages, or jump in and risk not knowing every argument put forward.
Again, I'd say that's their choice and I'm OK with that- obviously, either choice has it's disadvantages, but, at the end of the day, that's inevitable when looking at a 30-page thread.
One thing I would say, is that if the thread starter chooses to edit their first post to, in some way, summarise the thread, then, that's fine.
But, it's worth realising that, as they are heavily involved in the long-ongoing thread, I don't think there's that much of a chance that their summation will be particularly unbiased.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
member
114 posts
Location: Oxford
114 posts
Location: Oxford
Posted:
I think i agree with Stout.
I think i agree with Stout.
I had to beat him to death with his own shoes... but that's another story all together.
BRONZE Member
nut.
756 posts
Location: Bouncing off the walls., England (UK)
nut.
756 posts
Location: Bouncing off the walls., England (UK)
Posted:
I'd say no, at least for the chat/discussion threads- most people that join will probably base their responses on the last few pages, and changing the original topic could be pretty confusing if they do check back.
I suppose adding info or a summary as an obvious extra to the original post could make it clearer, but I can't see many people bothering.
I'd say no, at least for the chat/discussion threads- most people that join will probably base their responses on the last few pages, and changing the original topic could be pretty confusing if they do check back.
I suppose adding info or a summary as an obvious extra to the original post could make it clearer, but I can't see many people bothering.
THE MEEK WILL INHERIT THE EARTH!
If that's okay with you?
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Hmm - As previously stated, IF the OP is modified, the thread COULD be used as a resource. If ppl come across similar discussions on other boards they can swing back and gather informations and distribute them.
I'd say that many check the OP and then the last page (if the discussion moved on for quite a while and many won't bother to jump in)
You're quite right OWD that it depends on the person who started the thread and that updates might not be neutral but biased. There should be no obligation, of course and the OPer needs to be mature (enough) to consider both sides of the argument.
But I guess it boils down that the oOP should be clearly marked against the edOP...
Hmm - As previously stated, IF the OP is modified, the thread COULD be used as a resource. If ppl come across similar discussions on other boards they can swing back and gather informations and distribute them.
I'd say that many check the OP and then the last page (if the discussion moved on for quite a while and many won't bother to jump in)
You're quite right OWD that it depends on the person who started the thread and that updates might not be neutral but biased. There should be no obligation, of course and the OPer needs to be mature (enough) to consider both sides of the argument.
But I guess it boils down that the oOP should be clearly marked against the edOP...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com