Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site
Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1163
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:20 pm
- Has thanked: 310 times
- Been thanked: 297 times
Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
[the question may sound a bit Larry David (fans of Curb Your Enthusiasm will understand)]
I guess there is no fixed rule, but if you find an interesting thread, and have a fresh insight or something relevant occurs, is it better to start a new thread if the last post is say 12 months old?
I guess there is no fixed rule, but if you find an interesting thread, and have a fresh insight or something relevant occurs, is it better to start a new thread if the last post is say 12 months old?
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9129
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
- Has thanked: 4140 times
- Been thanked: 10023 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
bruncher wrote:
I guess there is no fixed rule, but if you find an interesting thread, and have a fresh insight or something relevant occurs, is it better to start a new thread if the last post is say 12 months old?
I'd post on the existing thread.
It's likely that someone might link to the older thread on any newer thread anyway, if the topics are related to any great degree, and that might then get more confusing than simply carrying on what's really just a long-term conversation on the one thread....
Some of the old TMF threads ran for years, on and off, and I always quite liked it when relatable new posts were added to older threads after a lengthy break - it all adds to the sense of this being an established and on-going community, I always think....
Cheers,
Itsallaguess
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:39 pm
- Has thanked: 139 times
- Been thanked: 306 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
There is no cut-off but alternate way is to start new thread and "link back" to the old one. That happens on HTP Practical for the "monthly dividend".
Raptor.
Raptor.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3606
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
- Has thanked: 550 times
- Been thanked: 1586 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
On LemonFool, a thread is promoted back to the top of the index list whenever there is a new post. So even a thread years old could go back to the top of the list.
Also remember, if you quote somebody they get a notification. Also regardless of age. So if you are specifically addressing someone, quote the relevant bit of their original post to notify them.
On that basis, I think subject is more important than time. As long as your post is still relevant to the original thread, it is probably better to keep them together. If it is related but not really the same, then start a new thread (true regardless of age)
Gryff
Also remember, if you quote somebody they get a notification. Also regardless of age. So if you are specifically addressing someone, quote the relevant bit of their original post to notify them.
On that basis, I think subject is more important than time. As long as your post is still relevant to the original thread, it is probably better to keep them together. If it is related but not really the same, then start a new thread (true regardless of age)
Gryff
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
Raptor wrote:There is no cut-off but alternate way is to start new thread and "link back" to the old one. That happens on HTP Practical for the "monthly dividend".
In that situation, the old thread is sometimes also linked to the new one.
I often prefer continuing with the old threads, especially where something technical is being discussed, such as at Taxes. Otherwise one is often going over old ground. Subject, of course, to legislation/case law having changed in the meantime. The search function here is excellent, which should make it relatively simple to find related threads. It does assist if the subject header is sensible, as it is on this particular thread.
What I don't find useful (particularly at HYP) is a separate new thread for a company's latest RNS. These could readily be added to a prior thread, changing the subject header should that be appropriate.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8209
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
- Has thanked: 913 times
- Been thanked: 4097 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
I'm in favour of adding to existing topics, rather than opening new ones, where there is reference back to earlier posts.
The individual RNS postings are, I believe, a consequence of not having boards for individual companies. The company boards on TMF were a convenient place both to place new items and to refer back to historic items. I was surprised that the individual company boards were not recreated. The "Shares" forum does not have an adequate structure to make this possible.
TJH
The individual RNS postings are, I believe, a consequence of not having boards for individual companies. The company boards on TMF were a convenient place both to place new items and to refer back to historic items. I was surprised that the individual company boards were not recreated. The "Shares" forum does not have an adequate structure to make this possible.
TJH
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
tjh290633 wrote:I'm in favour of adding to existing topics, rather than opening new ones, where there is reference back to earlier posts.
TJH
TJH,
You and raptor are both Mods. The above quote indicates you favour using old threads, yet recently you closed without consultation an extremely popular and active thread in the Bonds and Gilts section, forcing posters to post off-topic on other threads or open new ones. Raptor meanwhile seems to have banned me from opening a new thread about preference shares on the same board. My attempts have twice been deleted.
That makes me think perhaps starting a new thread is viewed negatively on TLF? Separate threads are useful IMO because they enable users to focus on particular areas of a discussion rather than have multiple parallel conversations intermingled which quickly becomes chaotic. [Computer programmers have a similar view about threads BTW!]
Do you not think there is scope for TLF to clarify the rules here? On TMF there was a relatively hands-off approach with board users at liberty to post or open threads at will provided they adhered to the on-topic principle. Here it seems Mods prefer to micromanage what you may post and where. It would help a lot if the principles of this micromanagement were spelled out.
GS
EDIT: Re. the OP's question, in keeping with my opinion above, I would favour NOT posting to stale threads except perhaps to update something directly relevant, but to post new material on new threads, even if the topic is broadly the same. I'd also favour policing this very lightly i.e. treating it as a matter of convention/etiquette rather than a rule to be heavy-handedly enforced. A short "Local Etiquette" summary linked along with the rules might be useful.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: "Unilever Trading Statement 1st Quarter 2018"
tjh290633 wrote:... The individual RNS postings are, I believe, a consequence of not having boards for individual companies.
The company boards on TMF were a convenient place both to place new items and to refer back to historic items. I was surprised that the individual company boards were not recreated. The "Shares" forum does not have an adequate structure to make this possible.
TJH
That's the beauty of the software used here.
It is perfectly possible to have an ongoing topic entitled, for example, Unilever. That topic can be used ad infinitum to discuss all matters of things on-topic for the forum and topic concerned. Any relevant new RNSs could be added to it. Changing the Subject header to, for example, "Unilever Trading Statement 1st Quarter 2018" as I've done above. In isolation, such as on this thread, it does look odd, but it wouldn't on a Unilever dedicated topic and, as has been said earlier, bringing that Topic to the fore.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
Re: "Unilever Trading Statement 1st Quarter 2018"
PinkDalek wrote:tjh290633 wrote:... The individual RNS postings are, I believe, a consequence of not having boards for individual companies.
The company boards on TMF were a convenient place both to place new items and to refer back to historic items. I was surprised that the individual company boards were not recreated. The "Shares" forum does not have an adequate structure to make this possible.
TJH
That's the beauty of the software used here.
It is perfectly possible to have an ongoing topic entitled, for example, Unilever. That topic can be used ad infinitum to discuss all matters of things on-topic for the forum and topic concerned. Any relevant new RNSs could be added to it. Changing the Subject header to, for example, "Unilever Trading Statement 1st Quarter 2018" as I've done above. In isolation, such as on this thread, it does look odd, but it wouldn't on a Unilever dedicated topic and, as has been said earlier, bringing that Topic to the fore.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That feature looks ugly to me but I am open to persuasion. Could you link to somewhere on these boards where subject change has been used effectively?
Thanks,
GS
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
Re: See The Boring Investment Green Room thread
PinkDalek wrote:https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=78&t=627
Okay, thanks. So I'm interested in the conversation about Murgitroyd group. How do I view that conversation in date order?
GS
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: See The Boring Investment Green Room thread
GoSeigen wrote:PinkDalek wrote: viewtopic.php?f=78&t=627
Okay, thanks. So I'm interested in the conversation about Murgitroyd group. How do I view that conversation in date order?
GS
Unfortunately you can’t, other than by using Ctrl-F or similar on each page. I tried a board specific advanced search but the results are not the full sub-thread:
search.php?keywords=Murgitroyd&terms=all&author=&fid%5B%5D=78&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=a&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
Not perfect but it works.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
GS and PD conversation untrackable because subject keeps changing?
PinkDalek wrote:GoSeigen wrote:PinkDalek wrote: viewtopic.php?f=78&t=627
Okay, thanks. So I'm interested in the conversation about Murgitroyd group. How do I view that conversation in date order?
GS
Unfortunately you can’t, other than by using Ctrl-F or similar on each page. I tried a board specific advanced search but the results are not the full sub-thread:
search.php?keywords=Murgitroyd&terms=all&author=&fid%5B%5D=78&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=a&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
Not perfect but it works.
Thanks PD. That's about as good as I managed too.
Agree, it's neat that you can change subject line, but I don't see how that is superior to simply starting a new thread, with all the tools available with threads. Quite apart from the fact that I can't find a way to do a poll without starting a new thread.
Maybe will study it sometime but should get back to investment topics now...
GS
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8209
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
- Has thanked: 913 times
- Been thanked: 4097 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
GoSeigen wrote:tjh290633 wrote:I'm in favour of adding to existing topics, rather than opening new ones, where there is reference back to earlier posts.
TJH
TJH,
You and raptor are both Mods. The above quote indicates you favour using old threads, yet recently you closed without consultation an extremely popular and active thread in the Bonds and Gilts section, forcing posters to post off-topic on other threads or open new ones. Raptor meanwhile seems to have banned me from opening a new thread about preference shares on the same board. My attempts have twice been deleted.
That makes me think perhaps starting a new thread is viewed negatively on TLF? Separate threads are useful IMO because they enable users to focus on particular areas of a discussion rather than have multiple parallel conversations intermingled which quickly becomes chaotic. [Computer programmers have a similar view about threads BTW!]
Do you not think there is scope for TLF to clarify the rules here? On TMF there was a relatively hands-off approach with board users at liberty to post or open threads at will provided they adhered to the on-topic principle. Here it seems Mods prefer to micromanage what you may post and where. It would help a lot if the principles of this micromanagement were spelled out.
GS
EDIT: Re. the OP's question, in keeping with my opinion above, I would favour NOT posting to stale threads except perhaps to update something directly relevant, but to post new material on new threads, even if the topic is broadly the same. I'd also favour policing this very lightly i.e. treating it as a matter of convention/etiquette rather than a rule to be heavy-handedly enforced. A short "Local Etiquette" summary linked along with the rules might be useful.
GS, I closed that topic for the reason in the final post. It had morphed into speculation which had been resolved by the RNS from Aviva. It was also in danger of becoming a series of abusive posts.
As PD has said above, there is merit in having company-specific topics on which updates about the company can be added. On the other hand, topics which descend into acrimony are better terminated, so that tempers and feelings can cool down.
TJH
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
tjh290633 wrote:GS, I closed that topic for the reason in the final post. It had morphed into speculation which had been resolved by the RNS from Aviva. It was also in danger of becoming a series of abusive posts.
TJH
Heh, since the abuse was mainly of me, it's ironic that I feel the thread should have been allowed to continue!! Personally, I think the abusers should be dealt with, rather than gagging the individual being abused or closing down the conversation. Conflict is acceptable. Abuse is not.
The Aviva preference share issue is still very much alive. Investors are trading the shares and some risk losing significant amounts of their capital based on their faulty understanding of the law. I post on these boards because of the ethos of educating each other about investment which I think is incredibly valuable.
If people who are expert in a particular area are no longer welcome to post on the subject they understand that is a great shame. However there are alternative investment related discussion boards where these topics can be discussed freely. I'm guessing that I am being subtly prompted to post on those instead.
GS
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8209
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
- Has thanked: 913 times
- Been thanked: 4097 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
It seemed to me that it was 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. You get attacked and respond, and it deteriorates into a vortex which is self perpetuating.
I appreciate that you have put a terrific amount of effort into researching the legislation and the conditions attached to the preference shares. It is the abusers who are the problem, but sometimes useful discussion is inextricably included in the topic.
My problem is that deletion of passages of text is not easy on my mobile phone, so I have to switch to my PC to do selective pruning.
TJH
I appreciate that you have put a terrific amount of effort into researching the legislation and the conditions attached to the preference shares. It is the abusers who are the problem, but sometimes useful discussion is inextricably included in the topic.
My problem is that deletion of passages of text is not easy on my mobile phone, so I have to switch to my PC to do selective pruning.
TJH
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
tjh290633 wrote:It seemed to me that it was 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. You get attacked and respond, and it deteriorates into a vortex which is self perpetuating.
I appreciate that you have put a terrific amount of effort into researching the legislation and the conditions attached to the preference shares. It is the abusers who are the problem, but sometimes useful discussion is inextricably included in the topic.
My problem is that deletion of passages of text is not easy on my mobile phone, so I have to switch to my PC to do selective pruning.
TJH
TJH, if this is the case, I don't recall EVER being informed of this or anything like it by the Mods. If my post(s) is/are believed to be part of the problem, then why can I not be frankly and promptly informed of that? [Yes, I know it's TLF policy that we don't have to be informed...]
When I have received a reason for deletion or any other comment from mods, here are the sorts of reasons given:
-"does not fit well as a stand alone thread"
-"I cannot see the relevance to the forum posted on"
-"[Edited] to replace a missing tag."
-"could not see the purpose of another thread"
-"[post] started to cause friction" [three days ago, but no reply to my request for explanation]
These are mostly about relevance/being off-topic, not breaches of other rules or boorish behaviour.
I know my views are often robustly and directly expressed, and when this challenges others' deeply held beliefs they sometimes lash out with personal abuse. However, I myself try not to target the person but only what has been written. When I occasionally cross the line and have it pointed out, being a decent person I immediately apologise. To the best of my knowledge Mods have never brought to my attention an incident of abuse for which I am even 50:50 responsible.
Further, you will find numerous posts, not only on TLF but also other boards where I do not even post, defending me against abuse, but would struggle to find one accusing me of the same.
Therefore, the allegation of my complicity, that it was "6 of one and half a dozen of the other", comes as something of a surprise! Why not suggest this in real-time when the incidents actually occur? I'd hope that TLF policy would act in support of targets of verbally abusive incidents.
GS
P.S. I recall once or maybe twice having responded directly to a serial verbal abuser, saying that I did not appreciate the abuse and required it to stop. Is this the sort of post you are referring to? If so, those posts were not addressed by the Mods either as a deletion or warning of any breach of rules. Again, I recognise such notice is not required, but it might be courteous/helpful.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5884
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
- Has thanked: 5825 times
- Been thanked: 2127 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
GS,
Please go easy on us Mods. We are all private individuals doing our personal bests to figure out what is right on the boards we look after in our spare time for no payment, using whatever technology we have to hand, in whatever real life limitations of jobs, christenings, funerals, sleep and cooking we are doing. There is no monolithic corporate entity standing behind us with a bible of corporate rite-speke and a chain of command that ensures the Kool-Aid is dispensed on tap and is always the same flavour. We all as individuals make our own mistakes and do our best. I do not look after the Gilts & Prefs board, and may (or may not) agree with what the Mods of that board did. However I am sure that they are doing their best within the limits I have described, and it is unfair to pillory them. We (and I) very much appreciate the effort you put in on the topics that matter to you. Please excuse us if the occasional post gets mangled by us in the crossfire.
regards,
dspp
Please go easy on us Mods. We are all private individuals doing our personal bests to figure out what is right on the boards we look after in our spare time for no payment, using whatever technology we have to hand, in whatever real life limitations of jobs, christenings, funerals, sleep and cooking we are doing. There is no monolithic corporate entity standing behind us with a bible of corporate rite-speke and a chain of command that ensures the Kool-Aid is dispensed on tap and is always the same flavour. We all as individuals make our own mistakes and do our best. I do not look after the Gilts & Prefs board, and may (or may not) agree with what the Mods of that board did. However I am sure that they are doing their best within the limits I have described, and it is unfair to pillory them. We (and I) very much appreciate the effort you put in on the topics that matter to you. Please excuse us if the occasional post gets mangled by us in the crossfire.
regards,
dspp
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1590 times
- Been thanked: 1579 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
dspp wrote:GS,
Please go easy on us Mods. We are all private individuals doing our personal bests to figure out what is right on the boards we look after in our spare time for no payment, using whatever technology we have to hand, in whatever real life limitations of jobs, christenings, funerals, sleep and cooking we are doing. There is no monolithic corporate entity standing behind us with a bible of corporate rite-speke and a chain of command that ensures the Kool-Aid is dispensed on tap and is always the same flavour. We all as individuals make our own mistakes and do our best. I do not look after the Gilts & Prefs board, and may (or may not) agree with what the Mods of that board did. However I am sure that they are doing their best within the limits I have described, and it is unfair to pillory them. We (and I) very much appreciate the effort you put in on the topics that matter to you. Please excuse us if the occasional post gets mangled by us in the crossfire.
regards,
dspp
I hear your appeal about how much Mods do and indeed have volunteered my help. But, I don't understand what you are saying here, sorry. How do YOU feel and what do you want me to do?
Here's what I want: just to understand why my post keeps being deleted. The reasons I've been given are that it's on a new thread and some unspecified "friction". But it's a poll and can only be posted on a new thread. Does that mean I am banned from posting polls? I could try to post a third time but without a go-ahead that could be a rude and provocative gesture. Mods have already deleted previous posts of mine multiple times despite my efforts to improve them.
GS
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5884
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
- Has thanked: 5825 times
- Been thanked: 2127 times
Re: Is there cut-off for responding to a thread
GS,
The very simple answer from me is that I don't know. I don't Mod the area you are referring to. Your general point is being discussed amongst us Mods and in due course answer(s) will come out. I'd like to write a longer response but I have to go on a work call right now and then drive 6-hours to a work appointment, and then do it again. We all have similar commitments and it can as a result take many days to get a Mod position to anything out-of-the-norm. What appears to you as being a simple request can have many other aspects to it when we chew it over amongst ourselves. Please bear with us as we do this.
By the way I can see that there are two very different ways of looking at the Prefs issue. I am very glad to see you effectively explaining and defending one point of view in as effective (and polite) way as you do as it causes me to think about it. Even if I don't instinctively agree with you. But I am just reading that debate when I have time in an attempt to learn, and I don't have any more time right now.
regards, dspp
The very simple answer from me is that I don't know. I don't Mod the area you are referring to. Your general point is being discussed amongst us Mods and in due course answer(s) will come out. I'd like to write a longer response but I have to go on a work call right now and then drive 6-hours to a work appointment, and then do it again. We all have similar commitments and it can as a result take many days to get a Mod position to anything out-of-the-norm. What appears to you as being a simple request can have many other aspects to it when we chew it over amongst ourselves. Please bear with us as we do this.
By the way I can see that there are two very different ways of looking at the Prefs issue. I am very glad to see you effectively explaining and defending one point of view in as effective (and polite) way as you do as it causes me to think about it. Even if I don't instinctively agree with you. But I am just reading that debate when I have time in an attempt to learn, and I don't have any more time right now.
regards, dspp
Return to “Room 102 - Site Issues, Complaints & General Chat”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests