MetaTalk is not the place for second-string MetaFilter posts December 17, 2001 4:24 PM Subscribe
Post it as a followup to an old thread (those viewing by recent comments will catch it), post it as a new FPP (not everyone has the same angst over FPP-worthiness), or don't post it at all. But don't post it here. IMHO. Discuss.
posted by mcwetboy at 4:29 PM on December 17, 2001
posted by mcwetboy at 4:29 PM on December 17, 2001
One is encouraged to update the thread proper. Previously discussed here.
That's not to say that if circumstances dictate otherwise, one shouldn't act otherwise. (In which case, see the alternate suggestions from mcwetboy.)
posted by Marquis at 4:35 PM on December 17, 2001
That's not to say that if circumstances dictate otherwise, one shouldn't act otherwise. (In which case, see the alternate suggestions from mcwetboy.)
posted by Marquis at 4:35 PM on December 17, 2001
Say it with me:
MetaTalk is a discussion area for topics specific to MetaFilter itself, or weblogs in general.
It's at the top of the damn page. I can understand some debate about what makes good/acceptable/stellar/mediocre/actionable MetaFilter post, but not about what belongs here.
Or, in less fightin' tones, what mcwetboy said.
posted by gleuschk at 7:36 PM on December 17, 2001
MetaTalk is a discussion area for topics specific to MetaFilter itself, or weblogs in general.
It's at the top of the damn page. I can understand some debate about what makes good/acceptable/stellar/mediocre/actionable MetaFilter post, but not about what belongs here.
Or, in less fightin' tones, what mcwetboy said.
posted by gleuschk at 7:36 PM on December 17, 2001
AFAIK, those viewing by recent comments won't see it, unless the main thread would be listed if they sorted by date. The date/new comments thing is only a sorting of data selected from the recent threads. The definition of recent depends on your user settings.
In other words, if you follow up on a thread so old that it's not shown by date, people won't see it. At least, that's what I understood from this old MeTa thread.
posted by andrew cooke at 3:16 AM on December 18, 2001
In other words, if you follow up on a thread so old that it's not shown by date, people won't see it. At least, that's what I understood from this old MeTa thread.
posted by andrew cooke at 3:16 AM on December 18, 2001
It's another one of those judgement calls we'll never get enough people to agree on. The main issue, first of all is that the posts just don't belong here in MeTa, period.
Since the discussion seems to be leaning towards updates(re: second post cited above), I agree that they should generally go into the original thread, so that the "CelebrityX is sick/sicker/dying/dead/and here's a memorial" phenomenon doesn't keep happening, for example. If there's a major change in the situation, then a new post is probably fine. Again referring to the one listed above, the fact there were already two threads makes the need for a third questionable since the backing off it mentions is a maybe. If Australia does decide to change the policy, then that would be a potential new post.
posted by Su at 3:48 AM on December 18, 2001
Since the discussion seems to be leaning towards updates(re: second post cited above), I agree that they should generally go into the original thread, so that the "CelebrityX is sick/sicker/dying/dead/and here's a memorial" phenomenon doesn't keep happening, for example. If there's a major change in the situation, then a new post is probably fine. Again referring to the one listed above, the fact there were already two threads makes the need for a third questionable since the backing off it mentions is a maybe. If Australia does decide to change the policy, then that would be a potential new post.
posted by Su at 3:48 AM on December 18, 2001
I think this discussion more properly belongs in MetaMetaTalk.
posted by bowline at 8:37 PM on December 18, 2001
posted by bowline at 8:37 PM on December 18, 2001
I agree that they should generally go into the original thread
Where it will never be seen--much less live--again, under the current system.
posted by rushmc at 9:20 PM on December 18, 2001
Where it will never be seen--much less live--again, under the current system.
posted by rushmc at 9:20 PM on December 18, 2001
More seriously, how might a little "recently updated threads" box in the sidebar do? A kind of link to "activity in the archives"?
posted by rodii at 9:23 PM on December 18, 2001
posted by rodii at 9:23 PM on December 18, 2001
More seriously, how might a little "recently updated threads" box in the sidebar do? A kind of link to "activity in the archives"?
That's a good idea. What should I use to determine recent activity? Look for more than x comments in threads more than y days old?
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:15 PM on December 18, 2001
That's a good idea. What should I use to determine recent activity? Look for more than x comments in threads more than y days old?
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:15 PM on December 18, 2001
maybe >=1 comment in a thread >=2 days old? if a thread is older than 2 days and a comment is added, i would toss the thread ID into another table which would be the recent-activity table, and when you want to load that information you would use that table. this way, you would not have to search through the entire thread table to see what's updated and what's not when people load the front page.
posted by moz at 10:27 PM on December 18, 2001
posted by moz at 10:27 PM on December 18, 2001
If you've commented in a thread, then any new comments should make it rise to the top when you view by "my comments".
Maybe there could be some box we could check to mark threads that we are interested in keeping tabs on and those could be shown in "my comments" instead of every thread you've ever posted in (which includes some threads that you don't want to keep tabs on and doesn't include others that you do).
Can I have a pony?
posted by iceberg273 at 10:53 PM on December 18, 2001
Maybe there could be some box we could check to mark threads that we are interested in keeping tabs on and those could be shown in "my comments" instead of every thread you've ever posted in (which includes some threads that you don't want to keep tabs on and doesn't include others that you do).
Can I have a pony?
posted by iceberg273 at 10:53 PM on December 18, 2001
maybe >=1 comment in a thread >=2 days old?
1 new comment in a more than a week old thread might be a better indicator.
posted by riffola at 11:00 PM on December 18, 2001
1 new comment in a more than a week old thread might be a better indicator.
posted by riffola at 11:00 PM on December 18, 2001
A week sounds good to me, too.
1142 is gonna get so busted.
posted by Marquis at 11:12 AM on December 19, 2001
1142 is gonna get so busted.
posted by Marquis at 11:12 AM on December 19, 2001
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by cell divide at 4:25 PM on December 17, 2001