OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE

Subject: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Peter T.
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 12:35 PM

Just a reminder to posters that if there is over about 100 posts to a thread (especially with long texts), older browsers cannot handle it and crash, or load far too slowly. Volunteers, or the person who started the thread, should start a round II with a link back and forward. You are cutting off people. We have some threads now of 200 or more postings that are essentially unreadable by members of this community.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: wysiwyg
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 01:36 PM

Oh, I thought you meant you wanted a Part Two for THIS thread!

Too soon tho, huh?

~S~

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: john c
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 02:12 PM

YEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!
Great idea!!
J.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Joe Offer
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 02:25 PM

Well, actually, Peter, ANYBODY can (and should) start a new thread on a topic when a thread hits 100 messages and is still going strong. If a thread has just about petered out (excuse the expression), then maybe there's no need to start a new thread. I think the second thread should be started by somebody who has something to add to the original thread, not necessarily by a volunteer or by the person who started the thread. If you start a second thread, be sure to post a message in the first thread (and preferably a link), leading to the continuation thread. If you don't know how to make links, a friendly volunteer will come along and add one for you. I followed Peter's advice and started a new thread on the recitation topic, but I had something to say to continue the discussion.

Generally, that's a good rule - if a thread hits a hundred messages, don't post to it (I'm afraid to look at the "killing the thread" thread, which has over 400 messages). And no, I don't want to start a new thread on THAT topic.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Skipjack K8
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 04:00 PM

It's a bit like The Madness of King George!

The sciptwriter had it as KG III, but the Sam Goldwyn people were messing themselves that they'd be inundated with calls that folk missed Madness of KG II and the original, and some say the best, Madness of King George.

So, bemused reader, if you'r still with me, it's a bit tempting to start "What's your favourite Presidential Candidate II" with the well trodden path "The original thread was kinda long, so...." and crashing the search engine as Mudcat thread missing paranoia takes hold!!

Skipjack

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Allan C.
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 05:38 PM

Father Joe, forgive me for I knew not what I did when I started that "Killing the Thread" thread.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Joe Offer
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 06:18 PM

YOU did it, Allan? Well, I hope you're going to the flaying Getaway. I wish to personally assure that your torture will be slow and painful...
Well, not really.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: catspaw49
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 06:55 PM

I regret my part in that turkey too, but I kept asking for someone to lock it out!

Now of course, I'm wondering what we'll see here......a part two at 100 as an example?

.......oy....................

Spaw

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Sep 00 - 11:52 PM

I think you have a good idea there, Peter. I'll go along with that. 100 postings, and no more.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Sep 00 - 12:01 AM

Aw geez Hawk, I'm so glad it meets with your approval!! Actually Peter is just noting a long standing kind of tradition, if not policy, around here and since we have so many new folks, they're probably not aware of it. Generally its much as Joe says and its helpful to hot link/blue clicky between the two so the first part doesn't get too long.

Spaw

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Bugsy
Date: 29 Sep 00 - 12:12 AM

I've never started a thread that went to 100 posts.

I think I'll just slink to one side and have a sulk.

CHeers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall)
Date: 29 Sep 00 - 12:47 AM

I wonder if this thread will make it to 100.

Rich

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 Sep 00 - 01:05 AM

Occasionally you get slow developing threads.An example is the Civil War music thread I started almost two years ago.It had about 30 posts immediately,then popped up again and grew to about 65,and recently passed the century mark. Although it might be a good idea to start a second thread,it's kind of nice to be able to summon it up complete.Sometimes,it also seems that a topic becomes diluted in follow up threads. But,yes,Peter i know what you mean.The gypsy lyric discussions were taking so long to load that I was getting error messages four out of five times.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall)
Date: 30 Sep 00 - 01:10 AM

So if a thread hits 100 and it is no longer remotely related to the subject, do you start the new thread under the name the old one started at or with a name more in line with where the discussion's going?

Rich

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Sep 00 - 11:08 PM

"99 posts to a thread on the 'cat,
99 posts to a thread..
If one of those posts is deleted by Joe,
There'll be 98 posts to the thread."

"98 posts to a thread on the cat,
98 posts to a thread........

*fiendish grin*

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Oct 00 - 09:49 PM

"97 posts to a thread on the 'cat,
97 post to a thread
Knock one down
Kick it around
96 posts to a thread on the 'cat"

Is there any other good way to keep this thread on the page all the time besides doing the above?

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall)
Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:18 PM

If you were reading this post and it was up to 99, can you imagine the responsibility weighing on you as to whether to be the one to crack the triple digit mark?

Rich

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Mbo
Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:26 PM

Is this another idiotic "killing the thread" thread? Why do we need this?

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Oct 00 - 12:04 AM

Of course, you had to post here and say that, Mbo.

Little Hawk. Not my reflection.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: rabbitrunning
Date: 02 Oct 00 - 11:48 AM

Actually, there are two ways to handle this. One is for Joe or Dick or someone to add a piece to the HTML at the beginning of the forum asking us to start new threads at the 100 mark, and alternately, he/she/they could make this a permathread as a reminder.

Subject: RE: OVER 100 POSTS - NEW THREADS PLEASE
From: rabbitrunning
Date: 03 Oct 00 - 11:26 AM

refresh