Comments on: Previously

Previously

cashman — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:21:28 -0800

How about a Previously Box? People often make FPPs and link previous posts. Previously, previously, previously. Pretty Please? Previously (partially).

It could be an entry box on the FPP form where you submit the url of any previously related threads you plan on linking. The result could go underneath the tags box when the FPP posts, or elsewhere. And instead of the word previously, maybe the title of the previous post could be auto-manifested as the link? or the number? Something. Or there could be something similar to the new related question interface in AskMe. Also, that link-forward idea in that previous MeTa thread was kind of nifty also. So for this FPP, something like: Detritus From a Dream February 29, 2008 11:37 AM Shaun O'Boyle recently returned from Cape Canaveral where he photographed the artifacts of the early space program. They are part of the Modern Ruins site, which is a great place to waste an afternoon. posted by Toekneesan (8 comments total) [add to favorites] [!] 9 users marked this as a favorite Related Threads Modern Ruins Best.. Urban... Exploration.. Site.. EVER. Bannerman's Arsenal Photoessay

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:27:06 -0800

Not a bad idea–in theory.

By: nowonmai

nowonmai — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:34:34 -0800

Cluttering up the New Post page with yet more boxes is a terrible idea, but extension of Related Threads to MeFi proper would be a great way to leverage the heroics of the backtagging team.

By: Jofus

Jofus — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:56:03 -0800

This sounds like gilding the lily to me. (The tendency, not the song.)

By: katillathehun

katillathehun — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:59:37 -0800

I kinda like this idea even if it is gliding the fillies or whatever Jofus said.

By: cortex

cortex — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:09:26 -0800

I'm pretty much in lily-gilding territory on this one, personally. I actually like the core idea, for what it's worth, and enjoy seeing good backlinks and context (and sometimes add them to threads myself in a comment), but I'm not convinced that making it an official posting widget is a great idea. Stuff that occurs to me:

- Ad hoc backlinks from either the poster or commenters seems to work pretty well as is, for the fraction of posts where it makes sense
- Making the posting page more complicated with out a really good reason is probably not a great idea.
- Yet more mod editing work when things go wrong.
- Trying to develop a set of best practices for what to include vs. not in the official box sounds like not a tremendous amount of fun; so, too, dealing with in-thread bickering over use and misuse of the box.

By: Abiezer

Abiezer — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:13:22 -0800

I'd miss the html screw-ups.

By: cashman

cashman — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:17:10 -0800

Great - thanks for the consideration.

By: Jofus

Jofus — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:24:26 -0800

Also, it would probably be depressing how many "previously"s there would actually be - in that it would become clear we were laughing at the same jokes over and over and over and over.

Mind you, it never did my old man any harm.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:51:27 -0800

Guilding the lily? Who is this mysterious guild? Is this some kind of cabal thing?

Oh, so that's what it means.

By: cortex

cortex — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:54:49 -0800

By: yhbc

yhbc — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:28:40 -0800

It's not technically a rule that the word "varmint" needs to follow any combination of the words "lily" and "livering", but it should be, in much the same way that no one is allowed to do the "shave-and-a-haircut" knock without following it up with the "two bits" part.

By: SpiffyRob

SpiffyRob — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:39:02 -0800

Not to be confused with shaking the dew off the lily.