Announcement

**SlowThinker** · January 1, 2001, 18:50

GP,
<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by GP on 01-01-2001 03:02 PM
Maybe we should go to branching threads. It looks like everybody wants this.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>Do you want to say I am the second man who wants subthreads?

Shadowstrike,
<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by Shadowstrike on 01-01-2001 05:01 PM
Bah! The day a branching structure is implemented here is the day I leave Apolyton.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>Do you have any argument (or link to a past debate, I am newbie here)?
[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 01, 2001).]

**Paul Hanson** · January 1, 2001, 20:24

<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by SlowThinker on 01-01-2001 05:50 PM
Do you want to say I am the second man who wants subthreads?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>

Basically, yes, he wants to say that but fears that everyone will laugh at him and his lacklustre campaign.

**SlowThinker** · January 1, 2001, 21:19

Are there any concrete arguments against our lacklustre campaign?

[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 02, 2001).]

**jcarkey** · January 1, 2001, 21:39

One of the best parts of this forum is the non branching threads. It makes things so much easier it is incredible. SlowTHinker, I agree with you on point seven.

------------------
Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

If Al Gore invented the Internet, then I invented the spell check- Dan Quayle

If someone doesn't agree with you, you haven't explained yourself well enough-Luther Ely Smith

**SlowThinker** · January 1, 2001, 22:02

<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by jcarkey on 01-01-2001 08:39 PM
One of the best parts of this forum is the non branching threads. It makes things so much easier it is incredible.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>It is not an argument. Explain it please. Why easier?
Did you look at LINK: my thread about Dips/Spies
Did you read my arguments <a href="#subthread1">LINK: supra</a>?

In any case, starter of the topic could decide if subthreads yes or not.

[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 02, 2001).]

**TCO** · January 1, 2001, 22:38

I think you have some great ideas about thread organization and control. Here is a link to my previous effort to convert the boards back to the old Nate Snitzer type boards:
http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum20/HTML/001154.html?23

And here is a thread where I slightly "jumped the gun".
http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum23/HTML/018364.html#4

(The snazzy #post tag doesn't seem to actually show the correct post)

You can see the growing support for the idea. I mean we can count UR as a supporter and if we stretch it Iaiaian also.

Here are the basic arguments for branching threads:

1. Branching threads have less repetition of content.
2. Readers can look at the tree and see specificaly which posts they have not read yet.
3. Instead of having to load a whole thread, you load a post.
4. Forums like this tend to hav more thoughtful posts and less spam.

[This message has been edited by GP (edited January 01, 2001).]

**SlowThinker** · January 1, 2001, 22:53

GP,
I have read past threads a little. I like the special way how you tries to persuade all people.

I imagined just one level of branch, full load of thread, and almost unchanged face of pages. It would suffice for my type of thread ("Info: Diplomats and Spies").

I will think about full subthreads now.

By the way, I have talked with DanQ right now. He is preparing the system of subthreads. He told me he will kick out of Apolyton all people that don't support subthreads.
[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 03, 2001).]

**MarkG** · January 2, 2001, 03:52

<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by GP on 01-01-2001 09:38 PM
1. Branching threads have less repetition of content.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>how so? if you have branches, you can't know what everyone has wrote easily(see #3)
<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
2. Readers can look at the tree and see specificaly which posts they have not read yet.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>this is doable on our forum right now. if you have visited a thread before and now has new posts, you know it in the thread summary page
<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
3. Instead of having to load a whole thread, you load a post.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>and when you want to read another post, you load it clicking on an link. if a thread has 40 posts, you have to make 40 clicks(instead of 1)
<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
4. Forums like this tend to hav more thoughtful posts and less spam.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>and they tend to be much easier to spam since every post takes up screen space
[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited January 02, 2001).]

**TCO** · January 2, 2001, 12:36

Mark, get with the program! Don't make me go back to the Addicted board.

**TCO** · January 2, 2001, 12:38

<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by SlowThinker on 01-01-2001 09:53 PM
GP,
I have read past threads a little. I like the special way how you tries to persuade all people.

By the way, I have talked with DanQ right now. He is preparing the system of subthreads. He told me he would kick out of Apolyton all people that don't support subthreads.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>

Good work. It'll be a lot easier to keep track of things without all those malcontents posting.

[This message has been edited by GP (edited January 02, 2001).]

**SlowThinker** · January 2, 2001, 12:55

Post 25
Let's try subthreads now 

Note: I won't talk about my idea about limited subthread system I need for my special dip/spy thread. I will concentrate to full multilevel subthread system. 

Update:
If you want to study the content then go to Post 40 on page 2. This post remains here as
a model of usenet branching system. <TABLE CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 WIDTH=624> <TR><TD VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=5>

1 GP: Branching threads have less repetition of content.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

1.1 MarkG: how so? if you have branches, you can't know what everyone has wrote easily(see #3)</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="6%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> </TD> <TD WIDTH="94%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> 

1.1.1 SlowThinker: You placed your note badly! Your post is not related to "repetition of content". You didn't answer the post.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="9%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> </TD> <TD WIDTH="91%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> 

1.1.1.1 MarkG: If you cant easily know what everyone has posted then it is very likely taht you will repeat something that has already been posted(content repitition)</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="12%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> </TD> <TD WIDTH="88%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> 

1.1.1.1.1 SlowThinker: I understand. I will answer in 3.2.1.1 (a link could be here)</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

1.2 SlowThinker: I agree. In current system, people often doesn't read all the thread if the thread changed much since their last visit and people don't search for old threads. Needless posts and threads arise then.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=5>

2. GP: Readers can look at the tree and see specificaly which posts they have not read yet.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

2.1 MarkG: this is doable on our forum right now. if you have visited a thread before and now has new posts, you know it in the thread summary page</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="6%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> </TD> <TD WIDTH="94%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> 

2.1.1 SlowThinker: I agree. Arranging by date/time is an advantage over subthread system. But this don't cooperate well with another good thing: post editing. But there is a solution: to add buttons "First", "Last", "Previous", "Next" (and "Show posts added since my last visit" with cookies). This solution is implementable for both systems (the current system (editing would be more useful then) and the subthread system).</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="9%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> </TD> <TD WIDTH="91%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> 

2.1.1.1>But this don't cooperate well with another good thing: post editing.
MarkG: most of the time edits in post are to correct a misspell or something like that, not to add something completely new to the post</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="12%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> </TD> <TD WIDTH="88%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> 

2.1.1.1.1 SlowThinker: Since everybody know that bulk of people won't find out they edited it. So I repeat 2.1.1: editing would be more useful then. Of course, some problems would appear if you would try to change "incremental" system to fully functional "editable" system, but i believe theses problems would be resoluble.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="12%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> </TD> <TD WIDTH="88%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> 

2.1.1.1.2 SlowThinker: Look 6</TD> </TR> <TR><TD VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=5>

3 GP: Instead of having to load a whole thread, you load a post.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

3.1 MarkG: and when you want to read another post, you load it clicking on an link. if a thread has 40 posts, you have to make 40 clicks(instead of 1)</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="6%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> </TD> <TD WIDTH="94%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> 

3.1.1 SlowThinker: Don't confuse subthread system and the possibility to load only subjects. These two things are independent. (Even in usenet you may load full newsgroup.)</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="9%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> </TD> <TD WIDTH="91%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> 

3.1.1.1 MarkG: in almost all cases, this is how branched forums work though...</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="12%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> </TD> <TD WIDTH="88%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> 

3.1.1.1.1 SlowThinker: That is not a reason not to change this habit.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

3.2 SlowThinker: I don't know how you imagine the system intimately. If you suppose only one post may be loaded for one click, then I agree with MarkG. Solution 1: It would be better not to change the practice and load a full topic. Solution 2: An improvement might be brought: you could set the desiderative level (depth) for the load at the forum page. Solution 3 (best!): You could load full topic and open and close threads like in Windows's Explorer.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="6%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> </TD> <TD WIDTH="94%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> 

> 3.2.1 Solution 3 (best!): You could load full topic and open and close threads like in Windows's Explorer.
MarkG: you still have the issue of having to move up and down the screen to see the new posts in various branches of a thread</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="9%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> </TD> <TD WIDTH="91%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> 

3.2.1.1 SlowThinker: I agree that the solution with Buttons "First", "Last"... (2.1.1) is not fully ideal (since it doesnt provide fully synoptic view), but dont forget buttons "Show posts added since my last visit" (I imagine this would provide a filter; posts would remain not to arranged by date, they would keep a branching structure). Besides, for quick information about recent history, you could provide a special "History" window with posts arranged by date.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="9%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> </TD> <TD WIDTH="91%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> 

3.2.1.2 SlowThinker: Look 6</TD> </TR> <TR><TD VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=5>

4 GP: Forums like this tend to hav more thoughtful posts and less spam.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

4.1 MarkG: and they tend to be much easier to spam since every post takes up screen space</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="6%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> </TD> <TD WIDTH="94%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> 

4.1.1 SlowThinker: Do you mean a large indentation of very deeply positioned post? 1.I think that short indent would be sufficient. 2. I don't suppose there would be posts with very high level. 3. You could limitate the maximum level.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="9%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=3> </TD> <TD WIDTH="91%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=2> 

4.1.1.1 MarkG: why have to limit to probably a small number(5 levels? 10 levels?) when you can have threads with 200-300 posts easily? </TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="12%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> </TD> <TD WIDTH="88%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> 

4.1.1.1.1 SlowThinker: Hierarchical structure may be built two ways:
a) The way equal to this post. All answers to one post have the same depth, Answer to a post induces an increment of depth.
b) The way of Post 40. All posts (starting post and answers) concerning one problem/scope of debate have the same depth (i will call them "type A" for future reference). Subproblems (minor problems/scopes of debate that have the same basis as main problem) causes indentation and an increment of depth (type B). Problems with a completely different subject of conversation start new thread or are inserted into apropriate area/thread.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="12%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> </TD> <TD WIDTH="88%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> 

4.1.1.1.2 SlowThinker: Look 6</TD> </TR> <TR><TD WIDTH="3%" VALIGN="MIDDLE"> </TD> <TD WIDTH="97%" VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=4> 

4.2 SlowThinker: I think this note should be connected to 1 (Branching threads have less ...). It is a similar idea.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=5>

5 SlowThinker: I don't think subthreads should be used flatly in all cases. And anybody could decide to allow subthreads for his post/thread.</TD> </TR> <TR><TD VALIGN="MIDDLE" COLSPAN=5>

6 SlowThinker: (This is an example of type C of point 4.1.1.1.1 ) You may think that the system would be too complicated and that people woudnt want to change the habit and to get used to new system. But, the man is very adaptive being. Transition to the new system would represents inconsiderable step for man who learned to use a computer, the Internet, the system of current forum... </TD> </TR> </TABLE>

[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 04, 2001).]

**SlowThinker** · January 2, 2001, 14:42

Last update of Post 25 was performed on January 04, 2001 4:00 AM

If you would like to continue to answer to post 25 using subthread system , then
1. Go to "edit" icon of Post 25 and copy the content to your editor.
2. Edit it. (I am using html tables to indent paragraphs. I suggest you to use wysiwyg html editor. Then replace all end-of-line markers by spaces. (You have to do this replacement: Apolyton treats all end-of-line markers (that were generated by the html-editor) as BR html-tags))
3. Post it. I will clean my old version then.

[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 04, 2001).]

**Busta Nova** · January 2, 2001, 22:35

Just my 2 cents - my first thoughts on poster ability to delete posts was that it would enable trolls to run rampant then delete all evidence of what they did. Sure they can edit their posts now but the evidence that they actually DID post still remains.

Just a thought there.

**SlowThinker** · January 3, 2001, 00:08

Busta Nova,
Look at my LINK: <a href="#post4">previous post</a>. I asked Provost Harrison who is "GP" there. But GP started to post to this thread later on.
I think it was useful not to disturb incoming readers and to clean the post. But the post still make this page longer now.
[This message has been edited by SlowThinker (edited January 03, 2001).]

**SlowThinker** · January 3, 2001, 00:10

A tip related to my suggestion nr. 7): If you place the cursor over "edit" icon, your browser shows you a link adress on the status line. "ReplyNum=" is the number of the post.

Announcement

Too much of information

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment