MGoBlog - Duplicate Posts

Submitted by eury on September 18th, 2009 at 2:15 AM

I am only speaking for myself as I don't know any other readers here but double posts don't bother me nearly as much as clicking on a double post only to find that the 14 comments are all non-value added "omg you double posted!" comments.

Is it possible that people could just contain their elite "I check this site every 45 seconds ere go: me > you" pithy comments and simply just ignore double posts?

The point system was not implemented to discourage brand new visitors to the site from accidentally posting duplicate material. It was so obvious trolls and spamsters could be negged to oblivion and not ruin our otherwise higher intellectual discourse.

I know that if I saw a double post with 0 comments, I would never spend my precious 30 seconds checking it out but if I see a known double post but with 12 comments, I will check it out every time.

Anyone else in the same Vikings Party boat? Brian(s), got any into this?




September 18th, 2009 at 5:20 AM ^

I don't know if you are talking about a specific situation or not, but at least keep the following in mind:

First, it's one thing if it's a double post with something that is long ago or is not tagged clearly. It's another if the same thing was listed clearly on the board one page ago. Or if it's the same person over and over who seems to "miss" the earlier post. You need to make a reasonable effort to check the board before posting to make sure a thread is not already there.

Second, some things are just so obvious that you have to know they are already here somewhere. Like if a recruit announces a commitment yesterday, well it's almost guaranteed someone on MGoBlog already picked it up and posted it. MGoBlog has 3,000 people a day looking at the obvious stuff and you should not assume you are so much smarter than everyone else that you saw something a day old while the rest of us missed it.

Meeechigan Dan

September 18th, 2009 at 7:13 AM ^

I actually agree with eury. The angst about double-posting is worse than double-posting. You ought to look at Rivals where their board is a continuous stream of reflexive vomit. This board is American Whig-Cliosophic Society compared to that.


September 18th, 2009 at 9:15 AM ^

I was on another online forum where double-posting was a problem - usually the moderator just closed out the comments for the post and pointed a link to the original.

But someone on the board decided to appoint themselves the double-posting Gestapo, and every time someone posted something they lived in fear of getting ripped in public by this goon calling them an idiot. It sort of ruined the camaraderie and I'd hate for the same thing to happen here.

Maybe Brian/OB/FA can appoint certain members here privileges as a Double Post Stasi, with the power to lock threads and point people to the proper fora.


September 18th, 2009 at 7:50 AM ^

Although I personally haven't commented on a double post before, someone should. Double posting is lazy, clutters up an already exploding board, and detracts from the forum because for a legitimate topic it dilutes the discussion. It is extraordinarily simple to avoid too. That does not equal me > you.

The King of Belch

September 18th, 2009 at 8:11 AM ^

It's been tolerated pretty well for a long time with gentle warnings or funny retorts. Same with posts that ask simple questions that have been answered by a front page UFR or injury report. I think peeps are just getting sick of it.

I bash Scout, but even they are growing surly with the double posts and repetitive threads and the replies there are growing ever more snarky toward those who do it.

Meeechigan Dan

September 18th, 2009 at 8:43 AM ^

At the core, this is mgoblog elitism. A small segment of visitors who are constantly on the site. I visit a lot - at least 5 or 6 times a day - yet I rarely "catch" a double post and often get that intersting tidbit from the second post. If I do see a DP, I think "Seen that" and move on.

Let's not turn this board into the rooster show that is Scout or Rivals where dudes with 33,524 posts patrol like the SS empowered by countless 'nm,' 'kthxbye,' 'um...,' 'not so much' replies.


September 18th, 2009 at 9:09 AM ^

about the "punch heard round the world"? If something is on the front page of the blog and it's in BRIAN'S post then yes that is a problem because it's disrespectful to Brian to post on here without reading his post.

Maybe I'm the only one here but I have no problem with that situation.

As far as "normal" double posts go if there is a DP and it was a few entries ago or on the previous page then it's a bit ridiculous. The board is getting cluttered, diaries are getting cluttered and good content only stays on for a few minutes until it gets pushed back because of all of the bs.

Rule: If something is several hours old we've probably already talked about.


September 18th, 2009 at 9:14 AM ^

I think more to the point is that you should discuss what is here and search first. It literally takes a few seconds to at least put forth a good-faith effort.

What I think it boils down to is people feeling they need to start their own thread to share their opinions. Also, the desire to be (First!) This is also true in the Diaries. What might be an outstanding MgoBoard post ends up as a mediocre Diary. I get the content either way, so this doesn't bother me too much.

I don't think I've ever started a thread here, most everything is already covered.

Everybody's gotta provide content I guess.

Can't complain too much, the level of discourse here is still far, far above most message boards I've come across.

Go Blue!


September 18th, 2009 at 9:49 AM ^

I have never criticized anyone for a double post. I just skip it and move on. But some of the double posts are lazy. It makes the site better if people at least make an effort to check before they post.


September 18th, 2009 at 9:51 AM ^

Yeah, maybe you're right. I think elitism is the right word, but what's so bad about that? I'd like for this board to be better than MLive and such down to the core. If that means jumping on people a little bit for posting something that someone else posted less than an hour ago, so be it.

Many of us have accidentally posted something that was already discussed, and probably got chastised. The easiest thing to do is laugh it off (because it's the internet) and try to avoid it in the future. We've gotten away from the instant negbang already, so the only time you're gonna get really blown up is if you're doing it constantly.

david from wyoming

September 18th, 2009 at 11:14 AM ^

Don't do it man. When skimming through a thread I tend to notice the avatars more then handle. After a few 100 posts you've built up a good reputation on the site (at least for me). If the picture gets changed I'm not going to directly make the connection between what you said on a new post and all the level headed posts you've make in the past.

Fresh Meat

September 18th, 2009 at 9:57 AM ^

I agree with what a lot of people have said and I think at the end of the day it's about degree. If it is something on the front page, or something on the first few pages of posts then I agree, that's pretty lazy. But on the other hand, I don't feel like I should spend more than 1 minute making sure it wasn't posted before. Lots of times if something isn't on the front page of posts I don't see it, so if someone double posts something that is on page 8, then good because I probably wouldn't have seen it anyways. And I also agree with the elitism critique. While I do realize that one of the great things about this board is it's high level of content, I think we need to balance that with keeping something as simple as a double post within the bigger picture of what's important in life.


September 18th, 2009 at 10:00 AM ^

For the most part people just post a link to the original thread and that's that. The search button isn't hard to use and if you've came across an article/piece of info that is older than a couple hours chances it's already on here. People don't seem to get that.

OMG Shirtless

September 18th, 2009 at 10:16 AM ^

If exploding and mocking a person for a duplicate post makes even one person use the search function before posting for the 3 millionth time that "Boren Is Fat", the mocking has served its purpose. You don't normally see people make the same mistake more than once, unless they are honestly stupid in which case they should be mocked.


September 18th, 2009 at 11:09 AM ^

People play the "we're just trying to police the boards" card as an excuse to engage in ass-hattery.

I don't enjoy seeing multiple posts on the same subject, but is it really any more effective to flame someone than simply ignore the post and let it die?

I'd rather see a handful of double posts with zero comments in them than see a board filled with people competing for the "ultimate flame".

david from wyoming

September 18th, 2009 at 11:18 AM ^

It's not being an ass-hat (maybe). Double posts don't really bother me at all, since I don't check the site every ten minutes and I don't notice doubles all time. But the logistical issue with double posts is how to have dialog on a topic on two or more threads at the same time. Have one and only one thread on each night's tigers game is great, we have one a place to fall in love with Rodney together (for Sammy...) but if there gets to be multiple posts there tends to be less community dialog.


September 18th, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^

It was a joke, ok? Playing off of the above post, get it? If you've been around here awhile, as in, a few months prior to your join date you would know that I am in no way trying to be derogatory, just playing around. I doubt they'll ban me. Bai


September 18th, 2009 at 12:00 PM ^

I read this board for years before I felt I could post. I saw that the same people posted over and over again, and it had a club-like feel to it. I eventually decided that even if I broke some unwritten rule I wouldn't get pilloried by all of the regulars at once because that didn't seem to be the way things happened on this board. The anonimity of these boards can lead to dickishness, but this is probably the most civil I have seen. I agree that people should search before starting a thread. I think you should be told the rules if you fail to follow etiquette.

2 questions: Where is the FAQ for this board and how do you award points?