Richard

[greg]

Can you stop resurrecting threads from 2 months ago? Not only is it pointless - few people can remember exactly what they wrote 2 months ago, or especially, exactly the reason why they wrote it. They certainly can't be bothered to read back through the whole thread to try and work these things out, and what the argument was all about.

And all you are doing is pushing current threads off the screen.

 

[GotSpin]

He can do what he wants, you dont own the forums. Btw me thinks this thread will be closed

 

[greg]

He can do what he wants, you dont own the forums. Btw me thinks this thread will be closed

It was a request not an order.

 

[marc71178]

A very valid one at that I'd say.

Only way it can restre natural order is be hoping everybody else ignores the threads.

 

[GotSpin]

It was a request not an order.

I know, i was just saying he can do what he wants. Not that im agreeing with what he is doing or anything

 

[greg]

I know, i was just saying he can do what he wants. Not that im agreeing with what he is doing or anything

Well we're probably agreed then I just thought an appeal to his inner soul might make a difference. Probably not though

 

[Richard]

As far as I'm concerned I've no obligation to not reply to something I'd have replied to at the time had I been able to.
As for the utterly ludicrous "it pushes current threads off the top page" - are people seriously incapable of moving to the 2nd page, or even the 3rd if neccessary? If James were to request that, after one of my breaks, I discontinue truncated discussions I'd be happy enough to do so - but I'd take a guess that he feels there is a point of the 2nd page.

 

[greg]

As far as I'm concerned I've no obligation to not reply to something I'd have replied to at the time had I been able to.
As for the utterly ludicrous "it pushes current threads off the top page" - are people seriously incapable of moving to the 2nd page, or even the 3rd if neccessary? If James were to request that, after one of my breaks, I discontinue truncated discussions I'd be happy enough to do so - but I'd take a guess that he feels there is a point of the 2nd page.

That may be true in theory, but in practice when threads drop off the front page, they die.
Still do what you like.

 

[Richard]

Do they?
Are there really insufficient people on this board who are incapable of pressing the little 2 button at the foot of the page to make ongoing threads cycle through the front page?

 

[Pratters]

Do they?
Are there really insufficient people on this board who are incapable of pressing the little 2 button at the foot of the page to make ongoing threads cycle through the front page?

Yes.

 

[Richard]

In which case I'd like to ask a simple question:
Why?
Why is there a limit of 25 threads that can contain attention in one go?
And one more thing: if someone (me, for instance - and I know for a fact that there are others like me because of the fact that the list of threads with me as last poster go onto the 2nd page sometimes and still get replies perfectly regularly) is cycling current threads and making sure those on the 2nd page stay alive why is it a problem?

 

[Pratters]

In which case I'd like to ask a simple question:
Why?
Why is there a limit of 25 threads that can contain attention in one go?
And one more thing: if someone (me, for instance - and I know for a fact that there are others like me because of the fact that the list of threads with me as last poster go onto the 2nd page sometimes and still get replies perfectly regularly) is cycling current threads and making sure those on the 2nd page stay alive why is it a problem?

Its quite uncomfortable if some one comes after ages and resurrects 25 threads or so most of which have gone back the pages for the simple reason that they have run their course to appear in front of your eyes again and most of the relevant topics go back to page 2. There is a reason why only 25 topics or whatever the number are shown on the main page.

Also if every one starts doing like you how far back will the original threads disappear?

Nothing personal against you Rich.

 

[Richard]

That's just the thing, though - they may have run their course - but for what reason? The only one - that I have been absent and the discussion has been truncated.
Also, do you know of anyone else who is so prone to lengthy absences and returning to resurrect discussions that had been prematurely halted?

 

[dinu23]

this thread is a joke!

 

[Pratters]

That's just the thing, though - they may have run their course - but for what reason? The only one - that I have been absent and the discussion has been truncated.

Then explain how most of the threads you resurrected wont last for long.

Also, do you know of anyone else who is so prone to lengthy absences and returning to resurrect discussions that had been prematurely halted?

No one else would act as inconvenient I am sure.

Any way the others and I have put our point across. If you refuse to try and understand it, its not our fault.

 

[greg]

Another factor is that people will often come on here wanting to say something about some current issue. They will quickly glance around to see if there has been any comment on it on existing threads, and if there isn't either comment on a thread loosely, but not directly, related to the relevant issue or start a new thread. They will not make the effort to start searching through page 2,3 etc because they will expect current issues to be on the front page.

And so topics get rediscussed and people get confused thinking they've made comments on one thread when in fact it was on another - this is why the administrators will endeavour to merge threads where appropriate.

People will only resurrect threads on page 2 etc if they are particularly interested in a debate they were having on one of the threads.

The problem with you resurrecting loads of old (and often dated) threads all at once is that it skews the whole board sending the current threads off the front page "before their time".

 

[Richard]

Then explain how most of the threads you resurrected wont last for long.

IF they don't (and we don't know yet whether they will or not) then it means that those involved do not wish to continue the discussions, which is up to them.

No one else would act as inconvenient I am sure.

Sorry?
Don't understand.

 

[Richard]

Another factor is that people will often come on here wanting to say something about some current issue. They will quickly glance around to see if there has been any comment on it on existing threads, and if there isn't either comment on a thread loosely, but not directly, related to the relevant issue or start a new thread. They will not make the effort to start searching through page 2,3 etc because they will expect current issues to be on the front page.

And so topics get rediscussed and people get confused thinking they've made comments on one thread when in fact it was on another - this is why the administrators will endeavour to merge threads where appropriate.

People will only resurrect threads on page 2 etc if they are particularly interested in a debate they were having on one of the threads.

The problem with you resurrecting loads of old (and often dated) threads all at once is that it skews the whole board sending the current threads off the front page "before their time".

Honestly, the way you talk you'd think it was a major global tragedy.
If the multi-thread problem does happen (and in my experience it's extremely rare), then it can be dealt with without an especially large amount of trouble by carefully pointing-out "we already have a thread about this" - linky.

 

[Pratters]

Sorry?
Don't understand.

No one else is as insensible to resurrect threads like you.

Really the example you gave - that no one else goes for such absence and then resurrects threads to justify yourself is crappy.

If other people do not do some thing wrong, it does not give me the license to do it.

 

[Richard]

Why not?
Why is there anything intrinsically wrong with a period of absence then a return? It is not my fault that the absence initialised ITFP.