I was on another message board the other day (can't remember which one - probably porn related) and people there/their/they're were getting dug out and warned about "bumping" old threads. So much to remember, depending on where I am. No wonder I get a little confused sometimes.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]I was on another message board the other day (can't remember which one - probably porn related) and people there/their/they're were getting dug out and warned about "bumping" old threads. So much to remember, depending on where I am. No wonder I get a little confused sometimes.[/quote]
If i start a new thread, if it is on the something that has just been announced etc. i'll scan the first two pages of the Forum to see if there is already one running on the subject.
If i was to start something on Rochdale away tickets, i'd hit Search and type in Rochdale to see if something already existed.
If i was to start something on a player, i would type the player's name into the search to see if there was anything relevent. If it didn't seem to relate to what i was going to add, i'd ignore it.
All those options take about 20 seconds, its not much of a burden.
The Forum 'moves' pretty quickly, there are 21 different threads that have been commented on in the last hour, around 80 different threads in the last day. Anything that helps that slight fraction more to help it moving smoother and easier to follow is appreciated, the key one being with regard to the first example given.
I like it when old threads are updated with new news or information.
Puts what is happening or being said into a broader context and often shows how views have changed or people got it right all along.
The only problem for me personally is when the old title is misleading in the current context ie the "Varney is vice-chairman" but that was a wind up title in the first place and the poster should be banned forthwith.
I quite like reading old threads when they pop up, it's like a little journey back in time. It's interesting to see how people's opinions have changed sometimes.
[cite]Posted By: Bedsaddick[/cite]Can we have some belated spring cleaning done i.e anything that's more than six months old is flushed down the karsy. Thanks
Whilst a lot of the old stuff could go, my plea to admin is not to delete everything. Some of the old threads contain fascinating information and memories about Charlton, it would be a real shame if they were lost.
Comments
But I agree with you that sometimes it can get annoying.
Link please ;-)
Totally agree . Can we have some belated spring cleaning done i.e anything that's more than six months old is flushed down the karsy. Thanks
Not if that affects the "New Bird on Countdown" thread - there'll be riots!
If i start a new thread, if it is on the something that has just been announced etc. i'll scan the first two pages of the Forum to see if there is already one running on the subject.
If i was to start something on Rochdale away tickets, i'd hit Search and type in Rochdale to see if something already existed.
If i was to start something on a player, i would type the player's name into the search to see if there was anything relevent. If it didn't seem to relate to what i was going to add, i'd ignore it.
All those options take about 20 seconds, its not much of a burden.
The Forum 'moves' pretty quickly, there are 21 different threads that have been commented on in the last hour, around 80 different threads in the last day. Anything that helps that slight fraction more to help it moving smoother and easier to follow is appreciated, the key one being with regard to the first example given.
Puts what is happening or being said into a broader context and often shows how views have changed or people got it right all along.
The only problem for me personally is when the old title is misleading in the current context ie the "Varney is vice-chairman" but that was a wind up title in the first place and the poster should be banned forthwith.
;-)
Keep pardew 'til Christmas...........
D'oh !
can't find em or am i going mad(der)