quicksilver
International Hazard
Posts: 1820
Registered: 7-9-2005
Location: Inches from the keyboard....
Member Is Offline
Mood: ~-=SWINGS=-~
|
|
The Resurrection of Old Threads
Form a personal perspective I can see no reason why the addition to an existing or even old thread cannot be resumed and added to. It not only saves a
great deal of time for moderators but it allows information (perhaps)almost lost to be reaffirmed & brought to light.
SM has never been similar to E&W. The Forum does not ban an individual who does not speak English as his 1st language, makes occasion errors in
his punctuation or compositional phrasing.
Overwhelmingly, members are not screamed at, made fun of, called racial epithets, branded with Swastikas, or locked in a closet.
The Forum also has an ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF INFORMATION. The resurrection of an old thread not only takes a great deal of work from the shoulders of
moderators but allows individuals an opportunity to have answered questions answered time and again. It is, in many ways, a very appropriate thing to
do.
Moderators may correct this notion or revise it but in general I believe it is a productive agenda & members should not feel compelled to shy from
adding to a thread that has been in disuse for some time.
Please READ the thread however, as it may be that the the very question has been answered; however it may also be that it was not answered in totality
and the instance for additional comments or questions will do more to make that information valuable - rather than lost.
Using the Search Engine is not always an easy task. If members really DO want to find information but find little or nothing related to the subject,
try an alternative spelling, quotations around two words or separate or marginalize the concept before giving up.
An excellent example is picric acid & associated aspects of chemistry. You may try a search for "picric acid", Picric, picric, Picricacid, PA,
TNP, Trinitricphenol, trinitrophenol. Bringing the subject to that search would use a comma-quotaion limitation: "Picric, synthesis" or "TNP,
preperation" or PA, Lab". You use a variety of spellings or abrievations a comma & a variety or concept or synonym / antonyms, etc.
Often subjects become SO broken that threads need to be merged, creating extra work. This NOT because of some anal agenda of the moderator but because
valuable information is adrift in SO MANY threads that the new member does no know which thread to use, starts a new one and on and on thee problem
spreads.
If two threads track equally on the same general topic; I do not have the answer on which one (older or newer) to resume but the likelihood is to pick
the larger of the two.
The real reason I even bring up this subject is that there is a great deal of information that MIGHT be lost if the Forum becomes SO large that either
it needs to be trimmed in size due to costs or that the Search engine itself becomes overwhelmed. Both of which are similar to a library selling off
books due to space considerations.
-=Disclaimer: this is only my opinion. I don't make any rules, you can do what you want; have a Merry Christmas & a safe a Happy New Year.=-
|
|
|
Polverone
Now celebrating 21 years of madness
Posts: 3186
Registered: 19-5-2002
Location: The Sunny Pacific Northwest
Member Is Offline
Mood: Waiting for spring
|
|
Agreed. Reviving an old thread is fine if you have something relevant to say about the thread's topic. Our internal search engine has always been poor
for anything but the simplest queries; fortunately Google indexes this site pretty well. You can search it by appending "site:sciencemadness.org" to
your query. If you want to search just the forum, not the Library or LANL documents, add "site:sciencemadness.org/talk/" to the query.
There are no plans to close or remove old threads from the forum.
PGP Key and corresponding e-mail address
|
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
