Threading - good news/bad news!

One of the best features of the new software, for me, is that in thread view or hybrid view I can see proper, two-dimensional thread trees. I know from experience elsewhere that this is a great tool for making sense of long, rambling threads where several little sub-discussions have branched off from the original topic - also, as a sysop (you call them moderators!) in another forum I appreciated the capability (we've now lost it!) to prune off those little sub-discussions into their own threads. That's the good news!

Now the bad news......threading isn't working as well as it might. A lot of replies show in the thread tree as replies to the thread's parent post rather than as a reply to the post they were actaully replying to. Obviously, the reason for this is that in linear view the 'reply' button is not linked to a specific post.

From a purely selfish point of view I would like to see replies only possible by using a 'reply' button within each post, as the current 'quote' button, to force all replies to be linked to the post to which they are intended as a reply. I appreciate that most people are quite happy with linear 'threading' & would see this as an inconvenience.

Thoughts/comments?

Personally, and in the context of this forum and of the use I make of it, I like the linear style.


Jim

I was wondering when anyone would pick up on this.

My personal preference would have been to force people to select which message they are are replying to, thus making the threaded and hybrid views relevant. For users like JimW who stick with the linear display the actual thread layout wouldn't change and all it means is people have to click one button before they actually start typing their reply.

It was actually one of the things that we didn't really go into in great detail in the beta test, so user comments welcome on this one guys.

I'd much prefer not to have to reply in the context of a thread below the top level. There are quite a few times when replies pick up and refer to quotes from several messages so the context is the overall one.

Jim

I'm with JimW on this one. Although sometimes replies are directed at a specific post, there are just as many times when replies are just "adding to the discussion", and as many again which answer specific points raised in more than one previous post.

If this means I will loose my beloved 'quick reply' no vote from me :)

You wouldn't lose your quick reply. You'd just have to press a button to activate it. The idea is you click on the actual post you're replying to...

I've seen it in use on other forums, and it doesn't get in the way at all. I don't use the threaded or hybrid modes, so I don't notice anything different in 'normal' view, just that there's more buttons to choose from when replying.

from a personal point of view, i prefer not to use the threaded mode, and absolutely hate it when i try and use a forum which does it. maybe it's the way each of our brains think, but mine thinks in a massive jumble and puts things together as it reads and in it's own logic.

i prefer a general reply, that way i can address a number of posts in one go without the need for spamming one thread.

and yes, keep quick reply, it's one less link to click...

I hate threaded mode. It's fine for some technical support or reference sites but for a general chat forum I dislike it in a big way. And I've seen forums who retain the quick reply box and force you to click on a 'quote' button on a particular post but that's all horribly clunky and, to be honest, most everyone clicks on the first reply that comes to hand and replies to that so the threaded mode is broken anyway.

I say if it ain't broke, don't fix it, stick to linear mode please.

Agreed - be a total mess if people just clicked on any old post to reply to, and not the one they really meant to.

I agree with Craig and Bella. More often than not I'm making a comment concerning one of the posts, as well as a general response to the thread, and I like to do it all in one post.

Put me down for a 'no' as well.

If you're going to reply to a post which is further back in the thread than the last 3 or 4 messages then much better to make reference to that post for example via the poster's name or including a small quote.

If you allow threaded replies there's a tendency not to include a quote so for those on a linear view it's actually harder to see which post your one line "I agree" actually refers to.

I'm another one for the linear approach, I just find it easier to read.

As for replying I tend to use the quick reply options as I find it easier, but I do like the new option to "Go Advanced" which I find quite handy for adding smiles etc.

Im with Craig and Bella on this, put me down for a "no" too the linear approach is the best IMO. For me the quick reply option is easier, although as Rob points out the "go advanced" option is quite good, but IMO its best left as it is.

I hate to sound thick on this but could someone explain in plain English what the hell you are all talking about.
Just to save you all asking me, I have my pages set to linear, and either use the quote or post reply for posting

I always use linear, the other modes just seem to confuse me... :bag:

much better to make reference to that post for example via the poster's name or including a small quote.

If you use the 'quote' facility, your reply will be linked to the post you are replying to!

If you allow threaded replies there's a tendency not to include a quote so for those on a linear view it's actually harder to see which post your one line "I agree" actually refers to.

It's not a matter of 'allowing' threaded replies - proper threading is there for anyone who chooses to use it. How do you know which post your one line 'I agree' refers to in linear view? If everybody used quotebacks there wouldn't be a problem for anybody whichever their preferred viewing option.

If you use the 'quote' facility, your reply will be linked to the post you are replying to!

And what if we quote from several posts in just one post? I, and several others, do this occasionally.

There are no plans to fully implement threaded mode at this time, therefore I don't think it's worth continuing this thread.