Matured Forum = Less Discussions?

[direstraits]

I've noticed that there is a dearth of new topics this couple of weeks here in the forum. We've also got a lot of new people, which is great. What I've noticed, however, is whenever a newbie posts a new thread on a topic that may have been discussed before, one of two things happen.

One, the topic is ignored by the regulars, leaving only other newbies to answer and the author to wonder where the heck the regulars had gone.

Two, the topic poster gets pointed to existing threads, which is a good way to learn what's already been said about the subject.

I'm not saying that either of these scenarios are wrong (heck, sometimes I do it), but I find that when newbies post and one of these two things happen, I can't help but feel that that may give an impression to new poster that we've talked about everything they could ever come up with, leaving them a little afraid to pipe up.

When is a good time to point newbies to existing posts, and when do we chime in to make the fellow feel a little more welcome? Does being a matured forum preclude new discussions on old topics?

This is just my general feeling, I don't know if others feel the same way. I did not intend to offend anyone with this post.

ds

 

[novella]

These are good points, ds.

I pointed a newb to search for older threads, mostly because I haven't read the author he was interested in and thought he'd like a reply anyway. That was the best I could come up with.

But I think you're absolutely right that people should be sensitive to newcomers' posts and try to give them some real discussion.

 

[Ronny]

Well if it is something I can answer quickly I do and sometimes I will add an older post on so they can see what others said. I don't mind answering again at all but I'm still new and so it's usually only my second time. I could see how if it's your fourth or fifth time it would be harder.

 

[tartan_skirt]

I noticed this and wondered... why don't moderators merge threads?

 

[Wabbit]

My 2 cents

I'm really against keep pointing out old threads. It's like "hey silly newb we already said this stuff! Don't you even know there is a search funtion?" I think a lot of newbies do feel intimidated by the pointing out of old thread or such comments as "don't you know there is a search function?"

Sometimes, if it's needed, I will point a new commer to a certain thread. This mostly happens, as Novella said, when I think they will be interested in a topic of discussion or that the old thread is valid.

Most of the time I don't see any harm in just starting a new thread. There are ALWAYS lots of new people here so for sure there are always lots of people that missed the old thread. If the old timers want to chip in on the new thread with what they said before ( I mostly do ) then they can. If they don't want to, then it's ok.

 

[jenn]

i've noticed this too, and regardless of the volume of my posts have only been here 6 months, so have had this happen to me. it does feel like "oh well said and done then". i like to revisit old topics, especially with all the new people.

i second wabbits opinion. nicely said.

 

[Rogue]

... Does being a matured forum preclude new discussions on old topics? ...

New discussions on old topics are welcome, but starting a new thread on the same topic every other day gets a bit tiresome. Ressurecting old threads would be better, so that all the members can read what has already been said and it doesn't have to start with the same arguments all over again. Older/ longer threads are mostly more developed concerning viewpoints and options.


Maybe the problem is the FAQ. It should tell the newbies all the rules (including the usage of spoiler and quote tags) and that searching for existing threads and ressurecting them is quiet an option.

Didn't the FAQ used to say that?


If every newbie asks the same questions and makes the same mistakes, it starts to bother members who have been around for ages. So they ignore the newbies rather than babysit them.

 

[novella]

If the forum was only about obtaining information, you'd be completely correct, Rogue, but I think that most people want to interact with other humans and have people respond to them personally. Not just read a load of other people's opinions.

I do get a little frustrated when someone posts to an old thread clearly without reading the thread at all, but then again I can understand someone wanting to start fresh. Like, it's worse when someone uses the search function and digs up a three year old thread. Everyone who posted to that thread is probably gone, so why not just start fresh in that case?

There's definitely a statute of limitations on old threads, something like three months. Anything older than that should probably just be left alone. It makes me cringe when a newbie digs up a two year old thread and posts a comment like 'how can you say that? I completely disagree." Like talking to a grave.

 

[Renee]

Older threads have may have valid and useable input from people that are no longer here to share their opinions and knowledge. I don't think it's ever wrong to point out an existing topic, but it might come across better if the person providing the link first shares their views and then offers that they might find more information in an older thread.

The only time I don't like someone reposting something that has already been discussed is when the older topic is still visible and hasn't been inactive for more than a month.

 

[jenn]

in my case it felt like a shut down. yes perhaps i should have searched to see if the topic had already been up, but you know, sometimes a thought hits and you go for it. i think how the response was phrased could have been different, like novella and renee said, more of a "hey you might be interested in these threads too" as opposed to a "it's been done, look here".

 

[Ice]

You've raised some very valid points DS. Personally I feel that if a discussion had been held recently, possibly the previous month, then I would say it is valid to point the newbie in the direction of the thread. However I wouldn't just say that this has been discussed before and possibly intimidate them and make them feel like their input isn't valid. I feel a far better way would be to post a reply first and then add a note to the bottom along the lines of, this has been discussed fairly recently is this thread xxx, maybe you might like to take a look at the various differing opinions that people have given.

 

[Ronny]

I do agree with Jenn, that if someone decides to redirect to a previous thread it doesn't have to be in a harsh demeaning way, which I've seen a bit of lately. Why make them feel so put down? a simple comment and hey look at this, too, would do it without hard feelings.

 

[lies]

I don't mind people opening up new threads, but I do believe using the search function is a must, especially when talking about specific books/authors. When I remember a thread that's relevant to what the user is asking, I usually do a quick search and add a couple of links. I never considered myself unsensitive in doing so, but I guess it might come off as just that to someone who's new to the boards.

 

[ions]

I hate new threads that are the product of laziness. If someone doesn't make the effort to search to get an idea what has been said on a topic why should anyone make an effort to answer? I personally like old threads to be brought back up. The fact that those who took part in the discussion then may longer be around is inconsequential. They have left hopefully their wisdom behind and what has been said, assuming it's read, can only enrich further discussion. The topic is at the top of the list and there for everyone to see and discuss again just like a new one would be except it's also informative.

I never looked at bumping up old threads as that's all there is to say on a particular subject. Especially in a book forum where discussions will rarely lead to the same definitive answer like discussions could in a technical forum. Searching first is respectful to those that have been here a while and the due diligence that you are responsible to do if you want to know about a topic. Discussion forums are discussion forums, not answering services.

I've had to point people to the search function on forums countless times and probably no longer do it with any tact. Regardless, if someone does take the time to go to the search page, run a search, and post the results this should not be taken as an insult. Not only have they answered your query, they've provided you with other people's answer to your queries. Nevermind turning you onto the power of searching.

 

[Rogue]

I hate new threads that are the product of laziness. If someone doesn't make the effort to search to get an idea what has been said on a topic why should anyone make an effort to answer? I personally like old threads to be brought back up. The fact that those who took part in the discussion then may longer be around is inconsequential. They have left hopefully their wisdom behind and what has been said, assuming it's read, can only enrich further discussion. The topic is at the top of the list and there for everyone to see and discuss again just like a new one would be except it's also informative.

I never looked at bumping up old threads as that's all there is to say on a particular subject. Especially in a book forum where discussions will rarely lead to the same definitive answer like discussions could in a technical forum. Searching first is respectful to those that have been here a while and the due diligence that you are responsible to do if you want to know about a topic. Discussion forums are discussion forums, not answering services.

I've had to point people to the search function on forums countless times and probably no longer do it with any tact. Regardless, if someone does take the time to go to the search page, run a search, and post the results this should not be taken as an insult. Not only have they answered your query, they've provided you with other people's answer to your queries. Nevermind turning you onto the power of searching.

I couldn't have phrased it any better.

 

[sanyuja]

Well, yes, I have noticed this too.

I want to classify the kind of topics into two types:
1. Discussion about an author or some book.
In this case, I think I _should_ inform the thread-starter about the existing threads on the same topic. This is because I _assume_ that the thread-starter is genuinely interested in discussing about the book and he (yeah, or she) would like to know what others have to say. It might happen that (and i have noticed this often) the existing thread might contain a very good comment by some user who is no longer on the forum and this would be lost if the thread is not refered to.

2. Discussion about books in general (or general chat)
I recently pointed a newbie to a few threads. This topic was about 'How many books do you read?' I am _not_ saying that this is not serious discussion. But, if 'ABC' doesn't come to know how many books 'XYZ' reads at a time, nothing is lost. In this case, I usually ignore the thread. If I don't tell the thread starter how many books I read a time, the sky is not going to fall off! I pointed him to existing threads because I _assumed_ he would be interested in that.

My 2 cents!

 

[dolphinfire30]

as a newbie I thought I would leave my point of veiw on this topic. I have been to other forums on different topics and after about 20 posts stopped posting because I felt like I didn't belong. So far here I have felt like I have finally found a forum for me, with that said, sometimes newbies are afraid to ask questions because they may feel left out. So even if they ask a question that has been asked before it is nice to get any kind of comeback, even if it is someone referencing to an old thread.

 

[Motokid]

When I first joined I started a thread on tattoo's...someone posted there was already a thread on that, and gave the link....the last post in the link was about a year before I started the new thread....so basically the new thread I started lived because there were many new members who decided to post in my thread rather than the older one...

However, when a new person drops in and starts a thread on (now take it easy Stewart....) The Da Vinci Code, or Dan Brown....a subject that this forum has seen over and over again, I see no reason why forum members can't post the links to the exisiting threads....

I think it comes down to the attitude with which the "we've already had a thread on that" comments are posted.

If it's something we just discussed at length last week people might not want to start all over again. If the topic has been dead for 6 months or more I don't see why it can't be started again....

 

[Shade]

There's definitely a statute of limitations on old threads, something like three months. Anything older than that should probably just be left alone.

I couldn't disagree more! When I post detailed comments on books or authors such as Ishiguro, Amis, Kafka, Nicholson Baker etc, my aim is that they're there for people to read long-term, and respond to whether or not I'm here to read their responses. Starting new threads happens - I did it on Jonathan Safran Foer as I didn't check for existing threads at the time - but I think there's a case for the new thread to be closed and the comments transferred to the existing thread, so all discussion about a book is kept in the same place.

 

[novella]

I couldn't disagree more! When I post detailed comments on books or authors such as Ishiguro, Amis, Kafka, Nicholson Baker etc, my aim is that they're there for people to read long-term, and respond to whether or not I'm here to read their responses. Starting new threads happens - I did it on Jonathan Safran Foer as I didn't check for existing threads at the time - but I think there's a case for the new thread to be closed and the comments transferred to the existing thread, so all discussion about a book is kept in the same place.

Shade, on further reflection, I think when it comes to particular books and authors (the primary purpose of the site) that you have an excellent point. On the other hand, what about off-topic argumentative threads and banter, of which there is plenty? There are some threads that can legitimately go on forever and keep serving a great purpose, such as What is your occupation? or Ishiguro or Salinger threads.