|
25 Apr 02 - 11:14 PM (#698820) Subject: posts over 100 long From: GUEST,mg I can't get into the war crimes one any more...can someone start a second one and explain to me once again how to do that? I'll try and learn and make it my business to split them off at 100...usually I can slowly get them after 100 but now I can't. mg |
|
25 Apr 02 - 11:59 PM (#698838) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: CarolC mg, do you know which of the posts was the last one you were able to read? I can send you the ones you can't get to in a PM if you want.
The way to start a new one is to start the continuation thread and put a link or the URL of the previous thread at the beginning of the new one, and the link or URL of the new one at the end of the previous one. I'll take care of it for you if no-one's already done it. |
|
26 Apr 02 - 12:13 AM (#698845) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: GUEST,mg if you can do the war crimes one that would be good. I did the TV one but don't know how to click. Can you tell me here..I give up on PMs because sometimes I am a member and sometimes I am not and it is too frustrating... mg |
|
26 Apr 02 - 12:17 AM (#698848) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: CarolC I started a new thread for you on the war crimes one. It's called, "War crimes - continuing discussion. Do you know which of the posts in the war crimes one was the last one that you were able to read? |
|
26 Apr 02 - 12:27 AM (#698855) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: GUEST,mg I went back and I was able to read all of them...thanks.. |
|
26 Apr 02 - 12:37 AM (#698860) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Louie Roy I personally agree with guest mg on the long threads.If we as intelligent people can't beat any thread to death in 100 opinions then they needs some new faces on the mudcat.When any thread reaches 100 Joe,Max or the ones who have the authority should delete this thread and any other thead that tries to revive it.Louie Roy |
|
26 Apr 02 - 12:54 AM (#698868) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Little Hawk One thing you can do, in the meantime, is load the posts in "descending order" I think it's called...from the most recent post down, that is... - LH |
|
26 Apr 02 - 01:16 AM (#698878) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Joe Offer I think Pene has a pretty good solution coming up. When a thread gets to I think it's 50 messages, there will be a button at the end that let you go to the next 50. It's coming soon. I think I can promise that now. -Joe Offer- |
|
26 Apr 02 - 03:52 AM (#698918) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Nigel Parsons The "Coming soon to a computer near you" option looks good! I would suggest some arbritrary automatic split of threads (again, 50 sounds good) but I don't know how much programming this would require. I can't agree with Louis Roy, some threads rapidly reach 100 postings without exhausting, and some before the other side of the Atlantic is awake. Other threads live on, and are continued 2 or 3 years later by those who make a point of searching for the information they require before starting a new thread. They then post to the old thread so that everyone can see what has gone before. So, to quote Marie Antoinette, a guillotine is not necessarily a good idea! |
|
26 Apr 02 - 06:31 AM (#698978) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: McGrath of Harlow I think when starting a continuation thread that's got anywhere near as high as 100 posts, it's a good idea to include in the opening post a copy of the last few posts from the old one, to enable people who couldn't load the old one to join in the discussion.
If it's a long old thread being revived it is quite possible to do that as well, starting it as a continuation with a bunch of old posts included, rather than just opening it up in a way that excludes quite a lot of us from reading it.
Remmember, some people have trouble loading threads with anything much over 40 posts. |
|
26 Apr 02 - 07:16 AM (#698991) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Nigel Parsons Ok McG, so I suggested an auto switchover at 50, make it 40 and there still will not be too many with multiple extensions. But, as I said, I don't know how much work this would involve for the PTB ! |
|
26 Apr 02 - 08:51 AM (#699022) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Jon Freeman My preference is for paging with a user defined page size. The advantage I think it has is that it caters for the fact that not all systems are equal. Someone on a slow system may find 40 posts quite enough but someone with a fast machine and a cable or DSL connection might prefer to read all the posts to a thread in one go and will have no problems loading threads over 100 posts.. Jon |
|
24 May 02 - 06:36 AM (#716639) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Mr Happy there's a couple of threads on the forum just now with 200+ they're interesting ones & shoudn't be took off could someone with the knowhow split these into manageable chunks with blue clisks for the parts there's 'where are mc's from?' & 'mc's ages' cheers mr happy |
|
24 May 02 - 10:59 AM (#716740) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: wysiwyg No, they can't be split, and they don't get "took off" either. (Read the FAQ) They can always be found using the age filter or Trace function. ~S~ |
|
24 May 02 - 11:31 AM (#716772) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Nigel Parsons WYSIWYG: you're right, "They can't be split", they're here, as they are. The point being made is that (in future) they should be split before they get to much over 40 items. An automated system would ensure that cross references were available. I have split a couple, and cross referenced, and then gone back to the original to remind people that the continuation is elsewhere (others with a greater input than I do so frequently!). But (human nature being what it is) people continue to post to the original thread (and often to the new one as well). An 'automatic' split might (I don't know enough to be sure) ensure that no new posts could be posted to the first section, and re-direct them to the second (3rd,4th) section. CHEERS Nigel |
|
24 May 02 - 11:37 AM (#716778) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: Joe Offer Well, if a new thread is started and people keep posting to the old one, I can fix that. Pene gave me a utility that allows me to move messages from one thread to another. I have to move one message at a time, so I'm not interested in moving more than about 15 messages. And generally, I don't like to spend much time fixing non-music threads. -Joe Offer- |
|
24 May 02 - 02:05 PM (#716884) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: wysiwyg Nigel, I know, I was just answering Mr. Happy's idea to split them. ~S~ |
|
24 May 02 - 05:36 PM (#716992) Subject: RE: BS: posts over 100 long From: greg stephens Joe Offer or anyone: if an automated new thread start-up is going to be set, could it be set at 40 messages. That is the current limit of UK ntl internet access, which I use. |