Does anybody read very old posts?

[Robk]

[ QUOTE ]
We're going to have to do something, and I am considering my options. This query is just to gather some information.


[/ QUOTE ]

Would getting rid of the Internet forum speed things up any?

[imported_Chuck Weinstock]

I pretty much got the answers that I expected to get. At this point I see two options (and deleting posts outright is not one of them...never really was):

1. Dump older posts into a flat file.
2. Move the older posts to a new "archive" set of forums that is separate from the main forums.

The key is to get the old posts out of the forum database. But there is no problem if they are stored in a different database. Also, I am somewhat indifferent if it takes longer for people to browse the archives than the main forums.

Either option is going to take some work, and won't be done overnight. In the meantime, during peak times, we're likely to experience longer delays than I would like.

Chuck

[Clarkmeister]

Please try and go with option #2. Having the archives be searchable is pretty key to keeping their usefulness high.

[Matt Flynn]

Archives are hugely useful. You can, with minor technical help, segregate your site to improve speed. Simplest way is get another IP address and put the archives on separate servers at that address.

If you are going to delete old posts you owe it to all of us to give us a few weeks notice so we can find and save our favorite posts. There are some very funny ones buried in there.

Matt

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
Please try and go with option #2. Having the archives be searchable is pretty key to keeping their usefulness high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I vote for #2 as well. In fact, while you're at it, Chuck, is there any easy way to improve the search feature? Is there, for example, some free search client that could be easily attached to the archives? It would be nice to be able to search all the archives at once, especially with some precision as you can in something like google. But I understand there might be a lot of work involved in setting such a thing up. I just don't know.

[Phat Mack]

Either of these options would work for me, but I agree that #2 would be the best. The "older archives" are a little more difficult to search but are still usable.

[dogsballs]

go for some form of #2, I say. The archives are invaluable.

[Cyrus]

I think someone already wrote this, but here's my two cents:

You need to separate the chuff (eg jokes, silly comments, irrelevant sub-threads, flames, etc) from the good stuff (the poker content). This means a daily job of monitoring the boards and marking the worthwhile posts & threads. (You can be alerted to worthwhile posts by readers, as well: "Hey, Chuck, I think the above post by XYZ deserves to be archived".)

Since you have not done this up to now, you will need to treat it the archiving as a Project. Assign this to someone, have him look over all the old posts, and to pick a large list of those he thinks are wirth it. Then he turns them over to the webmaster(s) who have final say.

The good stuff is archived, in proper thread mode, and the rest is totally junked.

ONE MORE THING ABOUT IMPROVING CLARITY IN THREADS: You have a default mode whereby the title of Post A, the post you are responding to, is repeated int he title of post B, the response post. This is bad for clarity. When you have a thread with fifty posts, all titled "Re: Poker hand discussion", you are left with two options to get the best information: Read all the posts (time consuming) or read the posts written by reknown posters (robs you of the potential good input provided by relative unknowns).

SUGGESTION : Make it the default mode that people have to write in the title. You will soon see the posts and the threads get a lot clearer. (And you will see that this will also make it a little easier when wading through the chuff in order to find the archiving-worthy posts.)

Compare these two hypothetical threads for clarity:

CURRENT SYSTEM :

Poker hand discussion wanted - PkerPlyr
---Re: Poker hand discussion wanted - MMMMMMM
------Re: Poker hand discussion wanted - Ray Zee
---Re: Poker hand discussion wanted - Ray Zee
------Re: Poker hand discussion wanted - Mason Malmuth
---Re: Poker hand discussion wanted - George

PROPOSED SYSTEM :

Poker hand discussion wanted - PkerPlyr
---Were you playing at the Taj? - MMMMMMM
------I guess Donald would be pleased! - Ray Zee
---You played it wrong - Ray Zee
------This is already covered in Poker Essays II- Mason Malmuth
---I was your dealer at that table- George

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
2. Move the older posts to a new "archive" set of forums that is separate from the main forums.


[/ QUOTE ]

this is clearly the best option. I read old posts sometimes and I really hate the digest forms for the oldest posts and also I hate flat mode.

al