Post merging methods

[Hederik 119]

Hi.

 

Right off the bat, let me state that this is as much a question as it is a suggestion, both of which concern how I feel about using the forums and how enjoyable an experience it provides. So I was warring with myself for a long while whether to post it under feedback or site questions etc., since this category is walled with all these caveats.

 

Anyway, let me get to the matter at hand: post merging. I understand that anti-flood technologies are a must in our day, and respect the presence of such on these forums. However, there are a few things that are either unclear or, hm, not entirely well-done.

 

First off, when two posts are merged, it is being done so seamlessly. There could be several hours, perhaps even days, between the two posts and the one would end here.

And the other start right here. No distinction.

 

Instead, a manner I've seen implemented on a number of forums I've frequented before was adding an automatically-generated annotation about the time of merging. So my post would end here.

 

Posted on 20.06.2016 16:23

 

And the next would begin right here. Nice and clear. If that should prove too much, maybe at least a couple line breaks to separate the two posts? Or a line?

 

This is obviously only ever the issue in the instances where one would post without there being any intermediary answer from other participants of the topic. Where would such a heresy take place? For me, that's the OOC topic for an RP. As a DM, I tend to post additional information or remarks that don't always require the players to reply. But any time I do post, I would like them to see a notification pop up.

 

Now, maybe I am understanding something wrong, but if I should just edit a post and slap a couple additional @mentions into it (especially ones that would have occurred earlier in the same post), that wouldn't trigger the notification, correct? Having done a few tests with a friend, it appears that editing in a quote seems to trigger it, even without merging and with the notification recipient being repeated. On the other hand, a merged post with recurring @mentions doesn't trigger a notification, just marks the thread as unread in the "Topics I've participated in" box.

 

If the concern should be about posting just for the sake of increasing post count, perhaps the merge mechanics could be lifted in sections with disabled post count? Or at least made less restrictive? Unless it should create a threat of unhealthy thread bumping, which nonetheless would classify as spamming.

 

With warm regards,

Hederik.

[Jeric 46,834]

It is unclear to me if you are talking about merging two topics together, or how a subsequent post from a member who has the last post in the topuc will merge both posts together. I'll give my opinion on both.

 

Threads are rarely merged. When they are staff specifically makes a post informing the members and the OP of the newer topic that a post is being merged. This notification should include either a mention or a quote.

 

Same member replies are merged for quite a few reasons. For one it prevents bumping your own topic. It cuts down on post count inflation. It improves readability.

 

Some of the features on the board are just there to improve the reader experience. This is one of those. It's a non issue if your topic gets traffic.

[Hederik 119]

 

 

It is unclear to me if you are talking about merging two topics together, or how a subsequent post from a member who has the last post in the topuc will merge both posts together. I'll give my opinion on both. Threads are rarely merged. When they are staff specifically makes a post informing the members and the OP of the newer topic that a post is being merged. This notification should include either a mention or a quote.

 

I'm surprised I managed to not be clear about this. I mean exactly the fact that two posts by the same user posted one after the other, even in the space of more than a day, will get glued together in an unappealing way. I merely mean to point out something that could perhaps use a touch of visual improvement for style, clarity and fuller information.

 

 

 

Same member replies are merged for quite a few reasons. For one it prevents bumping your own topic. It cuts down on post count inflation.

 

 

If my usage of the OOC post for RPing is in any way wrong or ill-advised, I apologize and will heretofore transfer all conversations with players to a common PM. These, even should they bloat, remain out of anybody's eyes and allow multiple repetitions of a single poster. There is no bumping, no post count abuse (even though, as I mentioned, there IS no post count in the OOC section).

 

 

 

It improves readability.

 

 

What I'm pointing out here is exactly that it doesn't. Or perhaps that it does so in a lackluster manner, doing away with several posts by the same person and cramming all of their messages into one ugly, cluster without proper spacing.

 

 

 

Some of the features on the board are just there to improve the reader experience. This is one of those. It's a non issue if your topic gets traffic.

 

 

All of which I pointed out, and respect. It IS an issue, however, in the situation I described. Again, I'm sorry that I pointed out something that could be improved. Private messaging it is, since no one else than an RP participant would be even marginally interested in it, and that system is already in place.

 

I still don't know how notifications work, but it appears an explanation will not be necessary.

 

Thank you for your time.

[Jeric 46,834]

When you say 'merge' the staff will almost always assume you are mentioning topic merging.

 

Sounds like an RP specific issue the way your are explaining it. At some point in the future there is supposed to be a RP specific site called PRP. This would be good feedback for that.

 

If I replied to a thread about dogs, and a day later I am still the last reply, what benifit would it have to make the added reply a second post? For this to work, you would have to make it so a same user adding a new post would not alter the topics order in the forum display. If it is sitting on page 2 it should remain there until someone else wants to add to it. You would also have to make it so it didn't count as a post.

 

Just my opinion.

[Hederik 119]

 

 

When you say 'merge' the staff will almost always assume you are mentioning topic merging.

 

 

Even when phrased as 'post merging', got it.

 

 

 

Sounds like an RP specific issue the way your are explaining it. At some point in the future there is supposed to be a RP specific site called PRP. This would be good feedback for that.

 

If it even looks like a forum or has any common features. Until there is any version of it to be viewed, be can just blindly theorize. And until then, RP section should remain as plain and barren as possible, so let's avoid even putting forward ideas on how it could work.

 

 

 

If I replied to a thread about dogs, and a day later I am still the last reply, what benifit would it have to make the added reply a second post? For this to work, you would have to make it so a same user adding a new post would not alter the topics order in the forum display. If it is sitting on page 2 it should remain there until someone else wants to add to it. You would also have to make it so it didn't count as a post.

 

If you tried to neatly separate your paragraphs or post something entirely disconnected from the previous thought, it would be a bummer to see it kicked rudely right under the last of your previous post.

I view this as unaesthetic.

 

Also, in a thread about dogs you clearly have announcements to make on a near-daily basis and a number of followers who want to get that update. I was wrong to assume that's the purpose of OOC threads; it also has nothing to do with blogging, which would solve some of the problems. Answer: use PMs instead. So simple, saves two people a lot of typing and achieves exactly as much. Silly me. (Wait, did I already arrive at this conclusion earlier? At both, actually.)

[Fhaolan 4,468]

Oh yes, the seemingly bizarre and random auto-appending of posts that goes on. When you post something, and then post again and the system auto-merges the two posts together no matter how much time passed between the two posts. Except sometimes it doesn't, for no apparent reason.

 

Yeah, that thing is annoying. I'm going to put a ticket in to the tech-ponies who have access to the back end and see if we can at least get an explanation as to why it doesn't always do it. It's probably something built into IP.B, which means we can't 'fix' it as such, but hopefully we can get an explanation for it.

[Hederik 119]

Well... that's something, at least. Thanks.

[Jeric 46,834]

Oh yes, the seemingly bizarre and random auto-appending of posts that goes on. When you post something, and then post again and the system auto-merges the two posts together no matter how much time passed between the two posts. Except sometimes it doesn't, for no apparent reason.

 

Yeah, that thing is annoying. I'm going to put a ticket in to the tech-ponies who have access to the back end and see if we can at least get an explanation as to why it doesn't always do it. It's probably something built into IP.B, which means we can't 'fix' it as such, but hopefully we can get an explanation for it.

It is a setting in the ACP ... and set by time IIRC. '0' disables it.

[Fhaolan 4,468]

According to the settings (thanks Jeric, I found it now), it's supposedly auto-merges posts if they are made within 24 hours. I swear there's other things that can prevent it from auto-merging, because I've seen it decide to not auto-merge occasionally, but that's not in the IP.B documentation. It doesn't help that it's apparently a function that is being removed from the next edition of IP.B, but there's some outcry from the IP.B community as a lot of people like it. So the documentation for it is a bit thin on the ground compared to the amount of conversation of putting the function back in to the next version.

 

I can see the argument for still having the function for our particular forum, but reducing it down to more like 2 hours or something.