Forum Wish List

[johndeere720GA]

Quite a few old posts have been revived (and are now seen by all; those who used classic view did not see them unless they went back several pages or more). On other boards, I have seen a thread closing timer with the intent of closing posts that have had no activity for a set number of days. Those posts get closed but are still available to search
For me, it would be nice (since when you are on a topic, there is a "skip to new" button) to land at the start of a topic as a refresher of the original post, and then we could click the skip to new to see the new posts.

 

[cpratt]

On the first issue, I was going to look at automatically closing off-topic posts after a short time, but leave on-topic posts available for further comment and expanding the original question. We've not discussed this as a team yet, so it's just an idea. The current plan is to leave on-topic open indefinitely since old tractors don't change and an old discussion is still pertinent. We were originally closing them after a time period but that meant duplication of effort for people answering the question. That is to say, they would have to recap all the information covered in the original question even though most of the question would have been answered in the past. An example might be that an individual searched on valve clearance adjustment in a search engine, then landed on a post that explains this, they follow the post only have an additional question because it didn't work for them (still too loose or too tight). If they ask an additional question on that thread to clarify, the extenuating circumstance that is tripping them up, can be explained without repeating the basic procedure already covered. This hopefully reduces duplication. On off-topic threads, there is no reason to keep them open, or may be no reason to keep them after a few days.

On the second. Do you mean rather than land on the new posts, start out at the top upon entry into the thread so that you can then Skip to New after reviewing the OP?

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

On the first issue, I was going to look at automatically closing off-topic posts after a short time, but leave on-topic posts available for further comment and expanding the original question. We've not discussed this as a team yet, so it's just an idea. The current plan is to leave on-topic open indefinitely since old tractors don't change and an old discussion is still pertinent. We were originally closing them after a time period but that meant duplication of effort for people answering the question. That is to say, they would have to recap all the information covered in the original question even though most of the question would have been answered in the past. An example might be that an individual searched on valve clearance adjustment in a search engine, then landed on a post that explains this, they follow the post only have an additional question because it didn't work for them (still too loose or too tight). If they ask an additional question on that thread to clarify, the extenuating circumstance that is tripping them up, can be explained without repeating the basic procedure already covered. This hopefully reduces duplication. On off-topic threads, there is no reason to keep them open, or may be no reason to keep them after a few days.

On the second. Do you mean rather than land on the new posts, start out at the top upon entry into the thread so that you can then Skip to New after reviewing the OP?

Except people don't review the OP. They read it as if it's a new post, and respond to it as if it was a new post.

Because the site has reset due to the conversion, the post is entirely "new" to everyone. Many don't stop to check the date or stop to check other responses. They want to put their two cents in (present company included). So they answer the original post and completely ignore the "me too" tucked in at the bottom. This has been a problem in every forum I've participated in since the late 1990's. Some forums address this by locking any topic over a year old. Some lock them sooner, like after 3 months.

If the "me too" is an entirely new thread, it will get attention. Even if it means rehashing old information. Sometimes that's good for the mind anyway.

Lately though, it's not "me too" posts. It's long standing members just out of the blue putting their two cents in on old posts. They must be seeing the "Similar threads" section, getting confused, and feeling obligated to respond to the posts listed there...

 

[johndeere720GA]

On the first issue, I was going to look at automatically closing off-topic posts after a short time, but leave on-topic posts available for further comment and expanding the original question. We've not discussed this as a team yet, so it's just an idea. The current plan is to leave on-topic open indefinitely since old tractors don't change and an old discussion is still pertinent. We were originally closing them after a time period but that meant duplication of effort for people answering the question. That is to say, they would have to recap all the information covered in the original question even though most of the question would have been answered in the past. An example might be that an individual searched on valve clearance adjustment in a search engine, then landed on a post that explains this, they follow the post only have an additional question because it didn't work for them (still too loose or too tight). If they ask an additional question on that thread to clarify, the extenuating circumstance that is tripping them up, can be explained without repeating the basic procedure already covered. This hopefully reduces duplication. On off-topic threads, there is no reason to keep them open, or may be no reason to keep them after a few days.

On the second. Do you mean rather than land on the new posts, start out at the top upon entry into the thread so that you can then Skip to New after reviewing the OP?

I agree with the logic of keeping the posts alive for the topic-specific forums.

For the second part, yes, that is precisely what I was describing,

 

[cpratt]

Except people don't review the OP. They read it as if it's a new post, and respond to it as if it was a new post.

Because the site has reset due to the conversion, the post is entirely "new" to everyone. Many don't stop to check the date or stop to check other responses. They want to put their two cents in (present company included). So they answer the original post and completely ignore the "me too" tucked in at the bottom. This has been a problem in every forum I've participated in since the late 1990's. Some forums address this by locking any topic over a year old. Some lock them sooner, like after 3 months.

If the "me too" is an entirely new thread, it will get attention. Even if it means rehashing old information. Sometimes that's good for the mind anyway.

Lately though, it's not "me too" posts. It's long standing members just out of the blue putting their two cents in on old posts. They must be seeing the "Similar threads" section, getting confused, and feeling obligated to respond to the posts listed there...

Yeah, I marked everything read prior to Jan 1 2023, but that wasn't well accepted for some of the reasons I gave so I reverted it. With an aware group of people concerning how modern forums work, my locking was probably not the best thing. But if people don't look at when something was posted, and just reply on a whim, it could be either a problem, or a benefit depending on what they type. They might improve the thread for the next person wandering in with the same question or revive it pointlessly (like asking a question of the OP to clarify when the person may be long gone). It would seem in mainstream forums, the concept of "necro-threads" and the anger against it, has dissipated in the last 10 years. Used to be really common that when someone replied to an old thread, you'd get a slew of "WOW, are you blind, do you realize that thread is 10 years old?" or some such juvenile nastiness. Doesn't seem to happen in the professionally oriented technical forums I have to frequent and I've not seen limits for a long time (not true on OT forums but I don't participate in anything like that, only on focused forums). People just answer the additional question posed and augment the thread.

The issue with similar threads is somewhat of a problem. Similar threads is normally only useful if you are posting a new thread or coming in cold from a search engine to look at a question, but there is some dissent about restricting it to just those cases (which might not be possible anyway). There are people who enjoy looking through them almost as a primary way of navigating. That works pretty well when you are specifically here on a tractor problem and does avoid duplication in on-topic threads. To stop what you are mentioning about the misunderstanding of it's currency, locking the old threads fairly quickly would probably help at the expense of the first paragraph issue. It's beyond me to guess what the majority want, and even worse, whether to eliminate a feature because people don't fully understand it. There are quite a few of those in the culture shock of moving from 1995 to 2023 so suddenly. I have my opinions on all of these things, but I just don't know the right way to take it for everyone. I will bring it up to the team as an issue.

 

[cpratt]

I agree with the logic of keeping the posts alive for the topic-specific forums.

For the second part, yes, that is precisely what I was describing,

On the second part, it is possible to have an option that allows a person to always start at the top rather than always start at the newest post. For one thing, with the threaded view, there may be new posts scattered through the thread, and starting at the top often makes the most sense. Such a user preference could even be tied to having the threaded view checked. There will be others who would dislike that, but it has merit since they don't even want to start at top or the new post, they only want to see a snippet of a thread. If we give them that, it would be irrelevant where they start. Just saying, yes, to start at the top might make the most sense for threaded view if you read the entire thread. This other group of people are primarily looking at off-topic and aren't as concerned with a thread, just pieces of it. Thus the two concepts may not be at odds. Good idea.

 

[DoubleO7]

For me, it would be nice (since when you are on a topic, there is a "skip to new" button) to land at the start of a topic as a refresher of the original post,

How about touching the Home key upon entry into a thread?

I guess maybe those do not exist on phones and tablets or some other devices?

 

[DoubleO7]

P.S. It might be beneficial to include the thread post number in the quote box. Maybe on the end of the username before the jump to arrow post arrow?
In my quote #7 above, I could click the up arrow in the quote box, knowing that it is from post #1 at the very top.

 

[cpratt]

How about touching the Home key upon entry into a thread?

I guess maybe those do not exist on phones and tablets or some other devices?

Definitely quickest way to pop to the top.

I was kind of hoping you were the phone guru for that sort of thing. I have no idea how to navigate on a phone myself. I'm betting that if the phone does have some sort home key replacement, it would require multiple taps and just swiping to the top would be less hassle.

 

[cpratt]

P.S. It might be beneficial to include the thread post number in the quote box. Maybe on the end of the username before the jump to arrow post arrow?
In my quote #7 above, I could click the up arrow in the quote box, knowing that it is from post #1 at the very top.

Not saying it's not possible, but what is in that quote is rather fixed since it's filled client side. I couldn't find a way to change it. Though it does have a hidden post id in there. Might be able to do something with that, though I'm not sure the context you are talking about. The quote doesn't show up in the Threaded View so only people in the Chronological view would be able to use it.

 

[DoubleO7]

Definitely quickest way to pop to the top.

I was kind of hoping you were the phone guru for that sort of thing. I have no idea how to navigate on a phone myself. I'm betting that if the phone does have some sort home key replacement, it would require multiple taps and just swiping to the top would be less hassle.

LOL, Whenever I am on the net via my phone I am using desktop site view. However, the up arrow in a quote box does throw me up to that post.
In both desktop view and phone view.
Android phone and firefox being used.

 

[cpratt]

LOL, Whenever I am on the net via my phone I am using desktop site view. However, the up arrow in a quote box does throw me up to that post.
In both desktop view and phone view.
Android phone and firefox being used.

Yeah, but that would only work in Chronological View, since most are running Threaded View, it wouldn't be available unless I drop a special box in there just for navigating to the post that post is replying to. Wow, that's a completely new concept I hadn't thought of.

 

[DoubleO7]

The quote doesn't show up in the Threaded View so only people in the Chronological view would be able to use it.

It does for me in Threaded View as I did not turn off quotes.

 

[cpratt]

It does for me in Threaded View as I did not turn off quotes.

Quite true but while we may see quotes as a feature, many see them as something that draws their attention from reading (I'm just assuming that's the reason, I won't pretend to be a psychologist). I just realized, the gray up arrow already takes us to the top so another link should take us to what the post replies to. Such a jump link would be better displayed as a separate link completely outside the text part of the post that when clicked would take them to what was being replied to. Kind of useless in this context, but would be valuable to jump, if the reply is up a few posts. Like I say, we already have the dark gray up arrow to pop back up to the top. The other kind of jump would be like below, clicking on the link would take us back to the post the reply was made to. I would also serve the same visual purpose of a quote without causing the reader to lose their attention. I could insert something like that because it's not in the post box.

 

[DRussell]

Except people don't review the OP. They read it as if it's a new post, and respond to it as if it was a new post.

Because the site has reset due to the conversion, the post is entirely "new" to everyone. Many don't stop to check the date or stop to check other responses. They want to put their two cents in (present company included). So they answer the original post and completely ignore the "me too" tucked in at the bottom. This has been a problem in every forum I've participated in since the late 1990's. Some forums address this by locking any topic over a year old. Some lock them sooner, like after 3 months.

If the "me too" is an entirely new thread, it will get attention. Even if it means rehashing old information. Sometimes that's good for the mind anyway.

Lately though, it's not "me too" posts. It's long standing members just out of the blue putting their two cents in on old posts. They must be seeing the "Similar threads" section, getting confused, and feeling obligated to respond to the posts listed there...

I agree with what I think Barnyard is saying here, if in fact he is saying what I think he is saying...how's that for being clear...

I'm not in favor of all these old posts being commented on and brought to the top again, primarily because the things that are talked about are so off topic most of the time. I'm referencing the tractor talk forum primarily. The brand specific forums are much more on topic and leaving those open to be commented on and brought back up probably is less of a concern.

It's just that so many of them simply result in rehashing the same arguments and positions that were argued when the post was first brought up. For example, see the Silverado 5.3 vs 2.7 post currently being rehashed on tractor talk.

 

[cpratt]

I agree with what I think Barnyard is saying here, if in fact he is saying what I think he is saying...how's that for being clear...

I'm not in favor of all these old posts being commented on and brought to the top again, primarily because the things that are talked about are so off topic most of the time. I'm referencing the tractor talk forum primarily. The brand specific forums are much more on topic and leaving those open to be commented on and brought back up probably is less of a concern.

It's just that so many of them simply result in rehashing the same arguments and positions that were argued when the post was first brought up. For example, see the Silverado 5.3 vs 2.7 post currently being rehashed on tractor talk.

That can be accomplished with Tales easily, not so much with OT in Tractor Talk. Probably need to an OT prefix so those threads can be identified and locked or purged sooner. We didn't set up prefixes right now, but they allow that sort of thing.

 

[Nadx]

Quite a few old posts have been revived (and are now seen by all; those who used classic view did not see them unless they went back several pages or more). On other boards, I have seen a thread closing timer with the intent of closing posts that have had no activity for a set number of days. Those posts get closed but are still available to search
For me, it would be nice (since when you are on a topic, there is a "skip to new" button) to land at the start of a topic as a refresher of the original post, and then we could click the skip to new to see the new posts.

I have a forum wish list add an off topic forum so the old Kountry life (forum) folks can have a place to chew the fat

 

[Rich'sToys]

I have a forum wish list add an off topic forum so the old Kountry life (forum) folks can have a place to chew the fat

Tractor Tales is the off-topic forum here.

 

[Brown David]

Tractor Tales is the off-topic forum here.

Supposed to be. Unfortunately, there's a lot of stuff posted elsewhere that should be in Tractor Tales.

 

[Nadx]

Tractor Tales is the off-topic forum here.

thank you! I shall navigate over there