Debate: Starting new threads or continue on the same

[acco34]

Why start new thread and link to an already existing thread. Why not just post in the existing thread?
This post should be merged into the other thread.

***
Splitted from If There is a Heaven, Tanya of Asservissante Is There With Me
***

 

[General Gonad]

Why start new thread and link to an already existing thread. Why not just post in the existing thread? This post should be merged into the other thread.

I always start new threads when reviewing a lady and, if you noticed, I provided a link to the other thread. Why do I do this? One reason is to make sure my thread will not be deleted and another is to title it the way I want to.

GG

 

[acco34]

and if everybody did that we would have hundreds of threads on every girl and the board would be a total mess and near impossible to follow.
Again, no need to start a new thread.

 

[General Gonad]

and if everybody did that we would have hundreds of threads on every girl and the board would be a total mess and near impossible to follow. Again, no need to start a new thread.

Guys, it's easy to search a lady on Merb. I find it hard to believe that people would get lost. The most recent threads show up and again, I refer to the other thread in my review. Let's focus on Tanya and not how we should post.

GG

 

[EagerBeaver]

GG,

I must agree with acco34, there is way too much board clutter and in the past there were severe problems with multiple review threads on different SPs. The Mods should forcibly consolidate all threads on the same SP, yours included. They should also devise ways to prevent loss of the information consolidated into one thread (i.e., thread starter can only delete his posts not the whole thread in review threads).

 

[General Gonad]

They should also devise ways to prevent loss of the information consolidated into one thread (i.e., thread starter can only delete his posts not the whole thread in review threads).

Until I see this happen, I will continue posting new threads when I review a lady.

GG

 

[sexstamina]

GG,

i'm gonna have to agree with acco and EB. just because other people aren't doing it doesn't mean you have to do the same, instead, you should giving the example to everyone. Instead, you just do as you please and give sorry excuses. just my 2 cents.

 

[General Gonad]

i'm gonna have to agree with acco and EB. just because other people aren't doing it doesn't mean you have to do the same, instead, you should giving the example to everyone. Instead, you just do as you please and give sorry excuses. just my 2 cents.

No excuses, my threads stay until the Mods can guarantee me that I will not lose my review if the initial guy deletes his post. I do not need board approval for this.

GG

 

[Love big tits]

I do agree that thread should be consolidated because of clutter but I will have to agree too that it is a pain to lose your own review because it is in someone elses review.
That is why, in the mean time, I use a little trick callled "save" . In a folder along with the pics of the lady I save in "word" my review, on my computer, with a password so that no one else can access them.
If my post gets deleted I always have a back up for my own little memory.

 

[Mysterious]

I have to say (gasp!) that I agree with GG here. If I'm searching for a girl I want a recent thread, not one started in 2005 with 75 replies to it. I prefer recent reviews with relatively small number of replies.

 

[Special K]

Could everyone stop pissing and moaning about consolidation and learn how to do a fucken simple search?!? STFU already! I'm sick of having reviews deleted because posters decide to start anew every 6 months...aka Eagerbeaver, etc. For once I agree with GG about something.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Could everyone stop pissing and moaning about consolidation and learn how to do a fucken simple search?!? STFU already! I'm sick of having reviews deleted because posters decide to start anew every 6 months...aka Eagerbeaver, etc. For once I agree with GG about something.

SK,

The Mods have already addressed this concern in another thread. The consolidated threads will have a Mod as the thread starter so that it cannot be deleted.

I have not deleted any threads in a very long time.........like 3 years.............and when I did, I was not aware that the thread starter could delete an entire thread as opposed to his own posts in that thread.

Consolidation makes research easier for every one. There is no reason for research to be unnecessarily difficult. We had situations in the past where posters complained that there were no reviews of a certain SP, when in fact there were 4 or 5 different threads when she had worked under a different name. Consolidation of these kinds of threads will lead to preservation of information that even a competent and diligent researcher would not otherwise find.

Example: the fomer Anabelle of Eleganza who had changed her name at some point in time despite stellar reviews (in at least 4 threads) under the Anabelle name. After the name change posters hit the 411 to say they could not find anything on her. This situation is PURE STUPIDITY and doesn't help anyone. Consolidation will help avoid this type situation.

 

[Big Daddy Cool]

One way to solve this problem and avoid starting new threads is to make all threads list their posts from present to past rather than the way it is now. For example as I type this post it would move at the top of the thread once I push the send button this way new views don't have to keep strolling down everytime. If another poster posts after me than my post is pushed down and his/her post takes first place as they are now the newest poster.

GG makes some good points about needing current info and hating to have to go through 75 reviews to get an updated version of the thread. Just look at the thread on Cleos with how many pages of reviews? It's a pain in the ass to need to go and surch pages and pages of info just to arrive at the right page. Plus what usually happens is that threads are popular for a bit, die down and then are popular again depending on the flow of traffic. What this means is that we can have a thread with like 10 pages and the last 3 pages are the most updated because their's a big time gap between the 4th to last page and the 3rd to last page. With a reverse order if we want to look at only the last 3 months then all we need to do is look at the dates rather than guessing waht page to start with.

 

[Techman]

I agree with both EB and GG. Threads should be consilidated and there should be a way to prevent them from being deleted by the thread starter. Until this is done, GG's way is the only way to protect your own posts and reviews. Once the existing threads are merged there will be no need to start fresh threads which duplicate existing ones. Until then...well GG's option is the only valid one.

As far as sorting through long threads is concerned, there is a little '>>' icon at the beginning of each thread title. Clicking on this will bring you to the first unread post in the thread. It saves a lot of time. You can also use the 'display mode' function and go to 'hybrid mode', which I find quite useful. Other forums to which I belong also give you the option to sort a thread by showing either the first post on a page or starting from the most recent. I wonder if there is an option to do this on vbulletin?

 

[sapman99]

My name in big letters?

Or, is it just me?

- Saving your writing in a secure space away from prying eyes is a no-brainer, so reproducing lost reviews is as well.

- The Mods have addressed the lost thread issue.

- I have seen many instances where an irate client starts a new thread with the 'ole "thumbs-down" smilie, and it's generally poorly received to do this.

- This thing with "75 replies clutter" is bull. All one needs to do is hit the "last page" button, read the last review and work his way up until they are satisfied they have enough info. I much prefer that kind of clutter to the "75 thread clutter".

 

[Mod 6]

Older posts first

May I suggest the following for people who hate parsing pages?

1. User CP (top)
2. Edit Options (left)
3. Thread Display Mode
4. Choose Linear - Oldest First

This way you will only see older posts first. No need to go the to first page unless you are looking for contact info (sometimes in the first pages).

Mod 6

 

[Techman]

Thanks Mod 6. That's exactly what I was talking about earlier. Didn't think of looking in the user cp for the option.

 

[Big Daddy Cool]

Hay guys. For those interested in making the lates posts available first, all you need to do is:

1- Click "Private Messages"
2- Click "Edit Options"
3- Go to "Thread DisplayOptions"
4- Go to "Thread Display Mode" drop down box
5- Select "Linear Newest First"
6- Click "Save Changes"
7- Get an escort, MP or SW to celebrate your new discovery.

Hope this helps.

 

[Mod 7]

Even easier. From the "New posts" threads list, just click on the double right arrows to the left of the thread tittle. That will bring you right to the first post you haven`t read since your last visit.

» Debate: Starting new threads or continue on the same

M7

 

[jacep]

I think that the threads on the same topic or same girl should be consolidated. This is one of the board rules although some of the MODS seem to give a lot/some leeway regarding this rule as they do for other rules.

However, I also don't like it where the originator of the thread can just delete the entire thread by deleting his/her post.