Revisiting the recent forum chage (moving active threads up)

[JTG51]

Now that we've had a couple of weeks to get used to having active threads move to the top of the forums, what does everyone think? Has anyone changed their mind?

I initially voted for it, and I think I probably would again, but I think it's a closer choice now.

The fact that it keeps popular threads near the top is a good thing. It also can bury a new thread though. Many times when I logon, I'll reply to 3 or 4 or more posts on the same forum in a row. I think many others do the same. If someone had just made a new post, it would now be burried under all of the ones that I just replied to. If there's a few responses in each one, the new posts often get pushed so far down the page that they never get noticed.

I know this has happened to a couple of my posts that I thought could have started an interesting debate.

Does anyone else think this is a problem?

[mikelow]

It can bury new threads, and sometimes a couple of clowns can reopen a dead thread from two weeks ago.

It has taken getting used to.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

For the reasons you mention, I prefer the old method.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

prefer old method

[andyfox]

I prefer the old set-up.

[Ed Miller]

I prefer the new setup. It keeps interesting and active threads at the top.

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Out with the old and in with the new and actively viewed. /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif I like the new setup. LGPG (look good, post good). Keep it current...... Babe /forums/images/icons/heart.gif

[Mason Malmuth]

Some threads are getting far more views than what the threads use to get. I think that's a good thing, and it appears the change is working as it should.

best wishes,
Mason

[Clarkmeister]

I think its a dramatic improvement that facilitates quality discussion on the threads of interest. Not all threads are created equal. Besides, if you are viewing the forum in "collapsed" threads (as I suspect most people do), a new thread sitting 6 or 7 down isn't that far down at all. Compare that to an engaging and thoughtful 4 day old thread is long lost to the view of most posters.

[JTG51]

You know, I've never used collapsed mode until this moment. I think I like it. It certainly solves the problem I complained about above. I like being able to see who responded to a thread before I open it, but I still think that's a good change.

Thanks.

[Ed Miller]

Ahhh.. I was wondering what you yokels were complaining about. No wonder you were worried about your three hour old post getting lost... /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[Insp. Clue!So?]

Since it's just a bunch of links, why can't the user have the option? bj21 has a number of thread options. It doesn't seem like it should be such an onerous programming job, and clearly there is a large body of people who want something different.

[MikeyEdge]

I thought there was something wrong with my computer. This new format is poor. If you check the forum all the time, you are looking for new threads, not ones from a month ago. I like it old school.

[Homer]

There are different configurations available for viewing the threads. Go to "My Home" (link at top of page) and check out the different options.

-- Homer

[Rick Nebiolo]

I'll abstain from voting for now because I haven't been that active lately. I'm wondering if this can't be programmed as an available option with the default set to the new way?

Regards,

Rick

[TimTimSalabim]

Having active threads at the top is convenient if you're a frequent visitor. I used to hate hunting down through many pages to find a recent post to an old thread, under the old way.

And if I haven't browsed in awhile, I still like the new way, because I can post a reply to an old thread and have others see it. Otherwise it gets ignored.

And as for newer threads that have no replies, they're still relatively near the top anyway.