locking threads - DPChallenge Forums

11/08/2004 12:11:23 PM · #1

While it might be a good idea to lock threads and point to old discussions, it seems to be going a bit too far in that direction.

There have been a few threads with interesting new ideas that get shut down and point to old threads - effectively killing the topic. The thread is locked so you can't respond to the comment, the new idea isn't in the old thread.

I guess I could copy the whole new comment over and then respond to it, but it seems a bit contrary to what forums are about...

frisca

Nikon D70

11/08/2004 12:17:27 PM · #2

Gordon --

Can you point to an example you think is eggregious use of locking and linking? This method of organizing the many threads we have is a new one for the SC and I for one wouldn't mind hearing a few thoughts on where folks think we either missed the point or didn't do what we were aiming to do.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR

11/08/2004 12:18:18 PM · #3

This has already been discussed hereand here. :)

myqyl

Nikon D3100

11/08/2004 12:19:23 PM · #4

I'm sorry, that has already been discussed here... Oh, wait... that one's locked... How about here?

:)

Edit : Dang it Marbo, guess I have to learn to type faster :)

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 12:20:07.

frisca

Nikon D70

11/08/2004 12:20:15 PM · #5

ahh, marbo! You silly goose. Neither of those links to threads, though I suspect the numbers are thread numbers. I think that for locking and linking to really be effective, this community needs to make better use of the search feature before starting a new thread.

11/08/2004 12:24:23 PM · #6

Edit : Dang it Marbo, guess I have to learn to type faster :)

Yes but aleast your links worked. I`m a silly goose. LOL

11/08/2004 12:30:16 PM · #7

Originally posted by frisca:

Not trying to single out Manic or anything, but this is an example of what I mean here

I think this is actually a new twist on the proposal to limit entries.
Now the poster did copy and paste his entire post to the other thread, but I don't quite see the purpose it served. Now the new 'old' thread popped up to the top of the list, as well as the locked 'new' thread - so effectively the cross linking makes two versions appear anyway - it doesn't reduce any number of posts on the front page (even if you ignore my little rant here).

Pointing to previous discussions can be useful (and would be easier of the search function worked more sanely) but I just don't see the value of locking threads - it tends to squash discussion. The habit of pointing to previous search results is often to the detriment of discussion too. So we discussed ideas before - occasionally things change. Wading through multiple levels of redirection, usually to threads that point to previous threads and so on, is interesting from a historical perspective but often not actually relevant.

I almost replied to that original thread, because it is a new idea. I didn't bother cutting and pasting the whole thing in to the new thread.
Maybe I'm just lazy.

I guess I'm just trying to say that I find the linking and posting to previous discussions, that seems to be very prevalent is making for a less enjoyable forum experience. It appears blunt and to a certain extent rude - the 'don't talk about it, we are already bored, don't waste our time' feel that it projects.

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 12:33:22.

11/08/2004 12:33:07 PM · #8

I think that for locking and linking to really be effective, this community needs to make better use of the search feature before starting a new thread.

This is true, but don`t you hate it when you see an interesting thread locked and redirected only to click on it and see it`s already 8 pages long and you have to spend the next hour trying to catch up.

Kamlan 28mm F1.4 MF for APS-C

11/08/2004 12:33:42 PM · #9

Originally posted by marbo:

Exactly. Also, I would claim that the search feature needs to work better before starting to say people should use it more.

Usually searching for a title fails.

Try "B&W printing" or 'printing' for an example, and note that there is a discussion on B&W printing on the front page right now, that was started around a week ago, but doesn't appear in the search results (top hit for 'printing' is the Discover Freedom thread in rant.

Doesn't take more than a couple of hits like that to just make you post to a new thread.

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 12:36:54.

Manic

DJI Mini 3 Pro

11/08/2004 12:49:09 PM · #10

Originally posted by marbo:

This is true, but don`t you hate it when you see an interesting thread locked and redirected only to click on it and see it`s already 8 pages long and you have to spend the next hour trying to catch up.

But surely if you want to make a contribution, it's best to see what others have already said on the subject to make sure you're not repeating something that has been said (in this case many times) before?

Yes, the search feature isn't as good as it could be, since it currently only searches thread contents and not titles, but that doesn't make it impossible to use...

PaulMdx

Canon EOS-1D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

11/08/2004 12:52:26 PM · #11

Go on SC.. Lock this thread! Lock! Lock! Lock! ;-)))

11/08/2004 01:01:09 PM · #12

But surely if you want to make a contribution, it's best to see what others have already said on the subject to make sure you're not repeating something that has been said (in this case many times) before?

Yes, your right and there is no way around this. But i also think the thread in question probaly would carried along happily.
I often read the forums at DPreview which is normally absolute mayhem with many repeating threads but the search works quite well, probaly because each reply has it`s own heading.

11/08/2004 01:51:40 PM · #13

Originally posted by Manic:

At least in this case, I don't think it actually had been said before, but also, I don't usually want to see a load of stuff that may well be out of date. I know in principle that we get lots of repeat questions, based on things that have been discussed in the past. Particularly, newer users that maybe haven't seen these things before.

A FAQ would be a great thing to point them towards. Posting links to previous discussions are also useful.

I just don't see any value in locking the threads. If people want to discuss it, does it matter ? Does it add to the discussion to tack it on to the end of an 8 page thread that nobody will read back through anyway ? CJ mentioned the original intent was to minimise the number of off-topic threads on the front page. I don't think discussing the recent huge increase in voting requirements is either off-topic or historically represented in previous discussions - just as a for instance.

I.e., in many, many cases the previous threads aren't actually relevant. I know in this case it was only about a month ago - but things do change. Clamping down, locking the thread, and pointing to an out of date discussion doesn't seem to help things, at least to me. You add another thread to the front page. You discourage discussion.

At heart, I'm asking what is the real value of locking the threads, when the discussion isn't contentious or needing to be stopped ?

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 13:54:01.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

11/08/2004 02:50:21 PM · #14

I'm totally in agreement that locking of threads is far too overused these days and can often stifle discussion.

(No I'm not going to spend the next hour wading through the forums looking for examples but I know that there have been several times in recent weeks where I have found this practice very offputting).

Where I think it's useful:

A momentous event has just occured (political, photography related, whatever) and several people have had the idea to post about it at around the same time. Amalgamating these threads into one is useful as everyone then focuses their discussion to one thread. Nothing (or very little) is lost in the other threads provided the locking is done fairly quickly on creation of the threads.

Where I think it's very unhelpful:

A thread is started to discuss an idea. Because the main theme of the idea is one that has cropped up before there are previous existing threads on the topic. However the most recent of these is at least several weeks old.

Locking the new thread and linking to the old one is very unhelpful because many posters see the old thread pop back up, assume they know what it's all about, avoid it thinking there's likely nothing new, and a possible new solution or idea is lost. Those who do click on it get lost wading through (and responding to) the OLD content and the new points/ ideas never really get a fair airing. And sometimes people do change their point of view on an issue over time. What I felt about an idea 6 - 12 months ago may well have changed today.

What's more the thread that is linked often has a significantly different slant to the one that has been locked and this new direction is also lost by locking the new thread.

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 14:51:33.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

11/08/2004 02:56:46 PM · #15

Perhaps if the entire contents of the "new" thread could be appended to the "old" thread to which it's re-directed would help.

I do get frustrated with people's "new" ideas or basic questions which are already addressed. Do we really need another thread called "How Do I Make A Border" when people can read all about it 10-20 times over? If someone wants to make comments mandatory, isn't it reasonable to ask them to review the 3000 previous posts so they can have some background on the pros and cons before they explain how to improve the site?

I think originally the main point of increased SC "activity" was to lock the political rant threads, most of which were CREATED to address a specific topic, but soon EVOLVED to cover the same range of related subjects and become virtually indistinguishable from one another, in addition to rapidly becoming repetitive and redundant.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

11/08/2004 02:59:57 PM · #16

GeneralE

Perhaps if we could distinguish then between threads which are asking for a specific factual answer which has thoroughly been answered and threads which are open discussions about CURRENT feelings and ideas surrounding various DPC issues?

Re politics - my preference would still be for a separate political forum (I like to be able to see threads on photo rants etc but not the politics). Then let them repeat themselves as much as they can bear to do so. Moderate only against personal insults and abuse and leave the rest as it is.

Canon EOS-20D

11/08/2004 03:08:52 PM · #17

The problem I see is that someone will start a new thread and it will have an idea that's been discussed a bunch but with a slight twist. Then, everyone who has posted their opinions on the idea in a previous thread will see that their opinions aren't in the new thread and will just repost them. What we end up with is another thread with 95% of the same content. I'm not sure how re-reading people's opinions every 2 weeks is that much better than not having to deal with old posts.

And since a few people brought it up, I think a lot of people do a pretty poor job of checking for previous threads on the same topic. Yes, the search function isn't all that helpful, but I'm talking the number of instances when someone posts a topic which is being addressed 4 threads under theirs. It would be really nice if people took 3 minutes to at least scan the front page of the section in which they are posting.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

11/08/2004 03:11:38 PM · #18

Originally posted by Kavey:

Re politics - my preference would still be for a separate political forum (I like to be able to see threads on photo rants etc but not the politics). Then let them repeat themselves as much as they can bear to do so. Moderate only against personal insults and abuse and leave the rest as it is.

This whole matter is (always) under somewhat ongoing discussion ... I think we were hoping there would just be less going on after the US election. I haven't been locking any threads myself, and I find searching for previous threads as frustrating as anyone.

One "trade secret" I have for effectively searching the forums is to insinuate a somewhat unusual word into the text of a post in a thread in which I'm interested, giving me a rare if not unique term for which to search. But no, I do not have an actual thesaurus sitting on the desk ...

11/08/2004 03:15:00 PM · #19

Originally posted by mk:

And since a few people brought it up, I think a lot of people do a pretty poor job of checking for previous threads on the same topic. Yes, the search function isn't all that helpful, but I'm talking the number of instances when someone posts a topic which is being addressed 4 threads under theirs. It would be really nice if people took 3 minutes to at least scan the front page of the section in which they are posting.

I think that's generally true too - but by default there are only 10 threads showing - I don't know how many people change that or actually use the 'forums' pages at all. I consider myself reasonably proficient with search engines. People even come to ask me a couple of times a day to run searches on google for them because I do a good job of finding things.

I find the search feature on here terrible - even for finding threads that I started myself in the past. I know the titles, I know the content and it still takes 20 minutes to find them if I ever do.

As Kavey said, I think it is perfectly reasonable to link posts to one if several start on the same topic, around the same time. Someone dies, something happens, that sort of thing. Posting links to previous discussons on a similar topic is also reasonable, though gets a bit repeatative too, I wonder how many click throughs those get. Condensing and collating the political threads is all reasonable too - though I'd prefer an ignorable 'Politics' forum too.

But the locking just seems to kill discussions, in a place that I assume is specifically for discussion. It doesn't encourage new ideas, new discussion, new tangents. I don't get the advantage that it brings is all - the 'ignore thread' option is fantastic in that regard.

11/08/2004 03:17:48 PM · #20

Gordon, you're freaking me out now. Are you just sucking my thoughts straight out of my head or are you just my weird wrong sex, wrong race, wrong age identical twin?

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/08/2004 04:08:17 PM · #21

Re the related discussion in the chat room:

I was asked whether there is a difference between discussing an old issue in a new thread and discussing it at the bottom of an existing thread. Quite apart from the fact that locking threads and referring to old ones doesn't usually transfer the discussion so much as kill it, to me there is a difference because many people will come to that old (topped) thread and get bogged down in reading and responding to the first (oldest) posts and never get to the new material.

Unless the issue was actually resolved then the ideal for me would be a new thread (where SC perhaps provide summary of the points and any conclusions reached previously) and then allowed people to continue in the new thread. This would allow focus to remain on NEW posts and NEW ideas (and some old ideas rehashed, certainly) rather than solely on what was said before. It would at least be more likely that newer ideas might surface and get a decent airing.

I would also ask that SC really consider whether the thread is a repeat of what was previously posted or whether it's actually a thread on a different aspect of a previously discussed topic and does merit it's own thread.

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 16:09:16.

Beetle

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

11/08/2004 04:26:19 PM · #22

I was very interested in the thread re limiting entries and losing your spot if you exchange photos. It made sense. I wanted to see more and perhaps contribute my opinion.
However, it was locked very quickly. I followed the link, saw that the old thread was very long and NOT about the same idea, it was quite different. I rolled my eyes, gave up on it and closed it.
See...... BAD idea to simply lock a thread just because someone in history once uttered a similar word. Even an exact repetition will bring new and different ideas to the discussion and therefore make it unique and hopefully useful.

deapee

Kodak V803

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 16-85 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

11/11/2004 04:39:59 PM · #23

.

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 16:56:54.

cbeller

Nikon D300

11/11/2004 04:56:55 PM · #24

Originally posted by deapee:

heh...thanks for locking this one ( //www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=142417 ), asking specific questions about whether or not anyone had made any money on shuttershock...and pointing me to this ( //dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=135447 ) 20 page discussion on the inner-workings of shuttershock.

Much appreciated.

The person that runs shuttershock frequents that thread and answers question. You can also PM that person (since they have a DPC acct)directly and they could answer your question.

You can also read through that thread and people talk about how much they have made so far.

deapee

Kodak V803