META: Thread Consolidation

Submitted by Syyk on

First, I made a similar post on the MGoBoard FAQ thread, but it doesn't seem like it got any eyes on it there, so I thought I'd create a thread for it and try to expand upon my points a bit.  Whether everyone is going to think this relevant or the best time to bring this up, I thought it might be a nice change of pace to discuss board improvements in light of yesterday's events.  Also, while I don't have many points.

I think this has sort of been in the air for a while, but I thought it might be helpful if there was a push to start consolidating threads.  I've noticed a lot of aggravation this week about the creation of new topics which are very similar to ones that have already been started.  In the last few days I have noticed new topics every time someone has a prediction for the UM/MSU game and we've had four or five topics about the #1 jersey that have been extremely similar.

If there was some sort of concerted effort by the mods and the regular posters to try and encourage posters to simply add replies to already existing threads, I think it would lower the stress-level around here a bit and make the board a bit easier to navigate as a whole.  I'm not sure how much good it would do to add something onto the FAQ about adding to similar threads rather than creating new ones, but I figure it couldn't hurt.

I suppose this idea is really just an expansion of the current policy of policing threads about topics which have already been discussed.  But, instead of having eight different threads about MSM predictions, the first person would just create a thread for general MSM predictions.  This would be especially useful for topics that this happens to regularly (like, I would assume the aforementioned predictions).  Whether or not this will do any good, as the effectiveness of the current redundant post policy is debateable, but I'd like to hear others ideas about it.

Finally, another issue that I think is in the same vein (but I know has already been brought up ad nauseum) I would like to see the broad split into some sub-boards (perhaps one for on-topic, one for off-topic, but sports related, and one for completely off-topic).  I'm not sure how feasible this would be  from a  technical standpoint or if Brian would even want to expand the board that way, but I think it would reduce a lot of the complaining about irrelevant topics. 

PhillyBlue09

October 10th, 2010 at 10:57 AM ^

 

Hey all,

Does anyone know if there is an iCal/Google Calendar/Outlook calendar anywhere with the Michigan Hockey schedule for the upcoming season?  I've googled pretty extensively to no avail and it's a bummer the athletic site doesn't support any of the above.  Could someone (read: rational poster not screaming about losing to sparty [we're still 5-1..]) kindly start a message board thread containing this message?

Fresh Meat

October 10th, 2010 at 11:03 AM ^

can we consolidate this thread into another thread?  Because I think it is a waste of space

And no I'm not cranky because of yesterday so STOP ASKING ME!  I SAID NO ALREADY.  sorry...sorry

Lordfoul

October 10th, 2010 at 11:28 AM ^

I can understand why people put up new threads instead of burying their ideas deep in already established threads, with less chance of being seen and responded to.  Everyone wants validation of their thoughts, and the current set-up doesn't allow for a good way to differentiate threads within threads.

I could see a front page with listed topics under which to start threads, perhaps with the mods bumping threads of particular import to a special area on the front page.  This way if you were interested in reading OT stuff, you could click the link to that topic, or if you wanted the latest takes on recruiting click that one.  This way if you want to rant about GERG, you would have a dedicated arena to work in and anyone that doesn't want to read that crap (even in thread titles) could simply stay away.

MGlobules

October 10th, 2010 at 11:41 AM ^

this is just the system as it's set up, and it works fairly well: someone introduces a topic and people respond to it. Personally, I don't see why people get so exercised: if the topic has already been discussed, or you are sick of it MOVE ALONG!

If topics appear twice in close sequence, yes. The mods could just lock the thread and direct people to the most recent post on the same subject. 

Making the type smaller to visibly accommodate more posts is one possible solution, as is simply lengthening the list to include more posts. Mods could also make a list of the day's most productive threads somewhere else, as Lordfoul suggests, or make a separate one for OT posts.