Big n' Daft.... EI Addio... McDog/Westie.... If they all got back together the comeback tour that would fill Wembley I reckon...
People know because they see that there are 2 threads then suddenly there is only 1. Even if they haven't read them at the time they still know they exist.
People have been complaining about merging for a few years now too. I'd argue that the BBS has Rab for far longer without merging threads than it has with merging them. The BBS is a community where conversations take off at random, two very similar but slightly different conversations at the same time etc. It isn't and into shouldnt be a place where people are made share a conversation just because it's the same subject. There are many many reasons people dislike it but from what I can see the only benefit is 'it looks tidier'
I’m open to hearing anything on this, but how does the above example ruin the website or experience? Also, the majority of threads are merged so quickly the number of people who actually see what you’re explaining is single digit in my experience. As I’ve said. It’s a tiny fraction that are merged.
That’s not true. The main benefit being shared, that you’ll have no doubt seen, is that it allows more topics to be easy to engage with, rather than threads vanishing off the first screen because 4/5 posts, saying the same thing, have taken over.
But surely it must be quite a few people seeing them, certainly more than the single digits that you believe, if so many people are telling you they don't like it. They've obviously seen them to make the decision
I actually think it makes them harder to engage with because even if there are just two threads with two posts each as soon as you merge them the flow is lost. To explain that another way think about the old threaded view. Where in the 'tree' would you insert the post you've merged without it making no sense?
So many people? It’s a 50/50 split and around 20 people in total. I’ll keep replies on your other quoted post rather than have two going. Trying to keep an eye on the cricket at the same time!
People in the main quote posts so the flow is maintained. Obviously not always, but everything has its flaws (including not merging threads). I can hand on heart say that over 95% of posts that I merge will have less than five replies and probably 80% of them don’t have any replies. So nothing is lost or forces anything to make sense.
I don't know how you've worked that one out. The ratio is 2:1 against merging from those who have replied and 22 people liked the OP compared to 6 on the first pro-merging post.
I count 12-10. Even if I’m being optimistic in favour of merging threads it isn’t 2:1. I’m also ashamed to have counted them, but C’est La Vie on that. You could argue that the 22 people liking the OP is way less than the amount of people that actually read it. Hundreds based on the analytics. I would guess the majority don’t actually care either way. But how about we just act like adults and people just highlight examples moving forward of merging they don’t like, and we can all do better together?
Somebody set up the ballot / poll pleeeeze ends all arguments....I'd do it if I knew how...but sadly I'm no techno
I can tell posts are merged because I click on it and then it says post not available or some such. And then I realise it must be merged and go and find the likeliest thread, in all honesty though, I'm spending way too much time on the board cos of COVID, so probably wouldn't have noticed so much normally.