The point of FT is to be able to easily find information on frequency programs and get questions answered.
This core function is becoming difficult to the point of impossible due to the proliferation of mega-threads that have become as general as 'complaints about flight attendant service.' Come freaking on, I am supposed to dig through 15 50-post pages of such a thread to find out if there are one or two FAs on a certain aircraft type in FC? And that's just one example. Look around, the mega-threads are out of control.
Further, when questions are placed in mega-threads they often go unanswered. I'm not going to click on a 20 page thread to look at a general topic, even though I may have a specific answer to a specific question posed in a mega-thread rather than a stand-alone thread, where I would have clicked and provided input.
Some subjects certainly do call for mega-threads. But not NEARLY so many as exist in the major frequency program forums now.
Can the TB consider amending the TOS to limit the over-use of mega-threads?
They really are destroying the user experience on FT.
Spiff
Dec 17, 10, 10:23 am
Could you provide us with some examples?
There are some very good "mega-threads" where an index or indices have been created at or near the top of the forum, such as this one in the American Airlines forum:
FAQ: American Airlines and AAdvantage - Please check here first! (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-aadvantage/959203-faq-american-airlines-aadvantage-please-check-here-first.html)
There are similar threads in other forums, though not all "mega-threads" have an index. Are you suggestion a recommendation that all threads over length X have an index added? Or something else?
B747-437B
Dec 17, 10, 10:46 am
Isn't there a mega-thread somewhere that this can be buried in? Say about 4728 posts down. :D
The last time I raised this issue, I was told that it was at the discretion of moderators and that discussion of moderator actions was verboten. Expect to see this discussion shut down pretty quickly as well - unless of course the TB members who are also moderators want to discuss it, in which case they can because they are doing so as moderators rather than TB members.
Hmm, perhaps there is something about two class of members after all?
All of these threads cover a WIDE range of topics under very general titles.
They make finding a specific piece of information intolerable.
Would an index help? Or splitting into smaller threads?
For example, in the Channel 9 thread, are all Channel 9 threads merged into this one or are there some Channel 9 threads that remain on their own and only "chatter" appears in this thread? What other information is lost/difficult to find as a result of the large thread size of this particular example?
DeaconFlyer
Dec 17, 10, 12:38 pm
What other information is lost/difficult to find as a result of the large thread size of this particular example?
One of the biggest problems with mega-threads in a technical one. When threads are merged into a mega-thread, a ghost post is left to show that a thread has been merged. However, clicking on that post, takes you to the first page of the mega-thread, not to the merged post itself. So even if you are interested in the original post, you have to go search for it within the mega-thread.
Mega-threads also making searching difficult and less efficient, as original posts usually have more specific titles, that are then lost when they are merged.
Also mega-threads that span many months often have out-dated or incorrect information as programs change and evolve.
Spiff
Dec 17, 10, 12:42 pm
One of the biggest problems with mega-threads in a technical one. When threads are merged into a mega-thread, a ghost post is left to show that a thread has been merged. However, clicking on that post, takes you to the first page of the mega-thread, not to the merged post itself. So even if you are interested in the original post, you have to go search for it within the mega-thread.
I can see where that would be frustrating. Perhaps a note to Suggestions/Technical Issues might get the IBB/FT development team interested in correcting that?
Mega-threads also making searching difficult and less efficient, as original posts usually have more specific titles, that are then lost when they are merged.
Also mega-threads that span many months often have out-dated or incorrect information as programs change and evolve.
Those are good points, but an index/indices + thread maintenance could address such concerns, no?
DeaconFlyer
Dec 17, 10, 12:48 pm
Those are good points, but an index/indices + thread maintenance could address such concerns, no?
I would oppose either as this would just increase the moderation of user content. I am fine with moderators editing posts to conform with the TOS, but not to change or correct content.
tom911
Dec 17, 10, 2:55 pm
Would an index help? Or splitting into smaller threads?
On some of these threads that cover multiple years, they really need to be split off into an entirely new thread. Does anyone really care who cleared UA upgrades in 2007? One of their master threads on upgrades starts with that year.
I'd much rather see a new thread at the start of each new year. If someone wants to go back and see who cleared upgrades back in 2007, does that really need to be on the front page of an airline forum? Would make more sense to have separate threads, which would not be as unwieldly, for 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and a new one in two weeks for 2011.
Here's the one that goes all the way back to 2007:
Upgrades becoming harder? [Merged Threads] (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus/819438-upgrades-becoming-harder-merged-threads.html)
tcook052
Dec 17, 10, 3:32 pm
Sorry but is the alternate to mega threads dozens of scattered threads on the same topic? Is that preferable to one mega thread? Not to me but that's MHO and quite obviously YMMV.
Also not all megathreads are created equal for example I use the UA paid upgrade thread a bit to gauge what paid upgrades will cost on certain routes so how hard is it to go to that thread and search within that thread using an airport code? If TB is regulating some mega threads and not others? Who decides which to change and which ones not to?
All of these threads cover a WIDE range of topics under very general titles.
They make finding a specific piece of information intolerable.Wow - there are over 600 [merged] threads in the UA forum.
The Delta forum, only slightly smaller than the UA forum, has around 75 merged/consolidated threads.
Passmethesickbag
Dec 18, 10, 4:40 pm
Indeed - the UA forum has become a desert of megathreads. Although UA is the airline I fly the most, I find myself checking out other fora most of the time. In the UA forum, a lot of informative or interesting posts either get buried immediately or never get posted because many members don't even bother anymore. What will happen when this forum is merged with the CO forum doesn't even bear contemplating.
SFOtoORD
Dec 18, 10, 4:42 pm
Wow - there are over 600 [merged] threads in the UA forum.
The Delta forum, only slightly smaller than the UA forum, has around 75 merged/consolidated threads.
That is quite telling. At least it is some quantitative data to help explain the sense I was getting that UA forum is becoming quite useless with all the merging going on.
UAL awesome
Dec 18, 10, 4:43 pm
The UA forum is the worst. I can understand merging threads if there are a couple on a recent news topic, like UA MP updates. But if I want to ask a question about, say Glenn Tilton, it will get merged into some mega thread that's over 3 years old that has really has nothing to do with the topic and my question will 99% go unanswered. It limits discussion and is just a mess.
tom911
Dec 18, 10, 6:02 pm
Does the Talk Board have any authority over this topic (megathreads)?
Recall that Talk Board issued a news article posting policy a number of years back, and when I pointed out that it wasn't being followed a year ago, was told the moderators have discretion to do whatever they want.
If you were to come up with some sort of policy on megathreads, would the moderators also have the discretion as to whether they follow that policy, too?
For those Talk Board members with access to the moderators forum, does the topic of megathreads ever come up over there?
jackal
Dec 18, 10, 11:35 pm
For those Talk Board members with access to the moderators forum, does the topic of megathreads ever come up over there?
Not that I've seen.
One of the biggest problems with mega-threads in a technical one. When threads are merged into a mega-thread, a ghost post is left to show that a thread has been merged. However, clicking on that post, takes you to the first page of the mega-thread, not to the merged post itself. So even if you are interested in the original post, you have to go search for it within the mega-thread.
This was recently [re]confirmed by Internet Brands as something not currently possible with the forum software. I am unsure if a future version will include this capability.
FWIW, I have mixed feelings about so-called "mega-threads." I can definitely see the point that it becomes harder to find and search for information buried in an extremely long thread, and it's unfair to expect someone new to the forum to read a 150-page (or even 25-page) thread to find an answer. They're definitely a bit overwhelming.
On the other hand, there are several benefits to keeping related discussion together:
It causes less turnover in the individual forum thread listings. That is, rather than 20 new threads being created in a couple of hours and pushing 20 older threads onto page 2, the same five or so threads just keep getting updated, making other threads stay visible on the front page of an active forum easier. (One reason I stopped going into the UA forum a couple of years ago is because it was just a constantly-churning mess of new threads popping up, which is--to me--more overwhelming than being able to ignore a relatively fewer number of megathreads on subjects that don't interest me.)
For those inclined to spend a lot of time reading and researching a given issue, it makes it easier to see related discussion and follow trains of thought in one cohesive place rather than having to find--and potentially miss--a new thread.
It actually makes it easier, in my experience, for those following a given issue to chime in and provide their expertise or viewpoints. Many people rely heavily on the "New Subscribed Threads" feature of MyFlyerTalk. If someone finds a thread interesting or has replied to it and someone posts a question in it, it'll show up there, making it more likely that someone will see it and post a response. A new thread can slip under the cracks much more easily. (An example for me is the "Consolidated ANC Meet-Up Thread. If someone posts they're coming to ANC in CommunityBuzz, I might miss it, but if they post in that thread, I'll respond within a couple of hours and we'll probably make a DO out of it.)
They are appropriate places to post small updates that really aren't quite deserving of their own dedicated thread but that are useful tidbits, especially when conjoined with other, related small useful tidbits. Two of the threads mentioned above--the "Consolidated 'UA Aircraft Sightings in Unexpected Locations'" thread and "The Consolidated 'Interesting Things Heard on Channel 9' Thread"--are perfect examples. Would we really want to see a new thread for every instance of a pilot asking for a game score over the radio or sighting of a UA 777 in ANC?
Now, all that said, I don't deal much with the other kinds of merged/consolidated mega-threads, and certainly none of the ones that I deal with in the Alaska Airlines forum are anywhere near the length of the ones posted above in the United forum, so my perspective shouldn't be taken as gospel. On the contrary, if it appears the vast majority of FlyerTalk members are displeased at current practices, it's the duty of TalkBoard to represent the membership to the administration of the forums.
SFOtoORD
Dec 19, 10, 8:16 am
Now, all that said, I don't deal much with the other kinds of merged/consolidated mega-threads, and certainly none of the ones that I deal with in the Alaska Airlines forum are anywhere near the length of the ones posted above in the United forum, so my perspective shouldn't be taken as gospel. On the contrary, if it appears the vast majority of FlyerTalk members are displeased at current practices, it's the duty of TalkBoard to represent the membership to the administration of the forums.
Great feedback thanks. I agree that there is definitely something to be said for this issue. In some ways, some of this is just the limitation of discussion board technology. For some of these megathreads, they'd actually benefit from being in a wiki or maybe captured in an index thread of sorts, but then let the discussion happen largely in the new threads.
I think the other issue at play here is what the threshold is for merging threads. One of the more egregious UA threads is the "positive UA experiences" thread. If you take the definition liberally you could probably merge 5-10% of all threads into it. (by the way, if there was a "negative UA experiences thread, you could probably merge 70% of all threads into it. :D )
bhatnasx
Dec 19, 10, 11:16 am
Could you provide us with some examples?
Search for the word "Consolitdated" or "Merged" in the title of a thread in the UA & AA forums and you'll see.
I agree with Koko that this is a problem (as do many FTers from what I've heard at various FT meetups) - but I don't know that the TB can regulate that is it's more a moderator thing.
That said, I do believe it's a huge probelm that's not been adequately addressed. I remember a complaint to Randy a while back & he had said (and I'm about 99.9% certain I read this or heard him say it, but I could be wrong) that the majority of the mergers/consolidated threads were due to member requests - I'm not sure that I believe that, but it's a problem.
[Redacted by moderator due to discussion of specific moderation actions]
Mary2e
Dec 19, 10, 12:35 pm
I agree with Koko... and it's not just the mega threads. It's also the lounge threads.
People are posting questions/hints/tips/info about the program in the lounge threads making it nearly impossible to find information.
I've tried keeping up with one or two of them, and it's nearly impossible, as there are several hundreds posts in each of them in a span of a few hours.
nsx
Dec 19, 10, 2:50 pm
It's possible that mega-threads are a symptom of a busy forum. In other words, the real problem may be the level of traffic rather than the use or non-use of mega-threads to organize posts. High traffic brings many difficult problems.
I don't believe that TB has any authority to speak on this issue, but I always like to hear new ideas on how to increase the value of FT to our members. In particular, if you know of other websites that handle high traffic levels in clever ways that you feel add value to their readers, please share that information here.
PTravel
Dec 19, 10, 3:15 pm
Wow - there are over 600 [merged] threads in the UA forum.I see this happening all the time in the UA forum. A particularly annoying instance is whenever asks something relevant only to Premier Exec or Premier members, e.g. about unlimited upgrades, the posts get transferred to a mega-thread that has a title like, "Will 1Ks continue to get unlimited upgrades?" The result is that the thread is ignored by other 1Ps and 2Ps, and the discussion focuses solely on 1K concerns. Aside from the overall hostility which seems to be the norm in the UA forum (and for which I hold the mods directly responsible), I wasn't aware that the only "relevant" topics in that forum are those that apply to 1Ks.
Mega-threads are rarely convenient, particularly when the original post date was years ago.
PTravel
Dec 19, 10, 3:16 pm
It's possible that mega-threads are a symptom of a busy forum. In other words, the real problem may be the level of traffic rather than the use or non-use of mega-threads to organize posts. High traffic brings many difficult problems.
I don't believe that TB has any authority to speak on this issue, but I always like to hear new ideas on how to increase the value of FT to our members. In particular, if you know of other websites that handle high traffic levels in clever ways that you feel add value to their readers, please share that information here.nsx, yours is a very well-run forum on many levels, and I don't recall seeing the chronic, "Your post has been moved to lumbering, creaky old thread," activity that I see in other forums.
kokonutz
Dec 19, 10, 3:59 pm
Well I posted a link to this discussion in the UA forum but it disappeared within an hour.
Perhaps it was buried in a three-year old mega thread about frustratingly difficult to use IBBs. @:-)
Canarsie
Dec 19, 10, 4:45 pm
Please allow me to impart my experience on this topic.The Delta forum, only slightly smaller than the UA forum, has around 75 merged/consolidated threads.I am a moderator of both the Delta SkyMiles and Hilton HHonors forums, as well as a Senior Moderator, which simply means that I am tasked with moderating forums that have no moderator formally dedicated to them.
In the Delta SkyMiles forum, as well as in my role as Senior Moderator, most of the threads I merge are specifically upon request — usually as reported to the moderators — and only if it makes sense. I rarely merge threads on my own.
When I first became moderator of the Hilton HHonors forum, the one issue of feedback I received overwhelmingly is that there were too many threads pertaining to similar Hilton HHonors properties. There were greater than 100 threads regarding Hilton HHonors properties with the word “Paris” in the title, rendering searching for information about Hilton HHonors properties in Paris virtually useless. After we spent months cleaning up the Hilton HHonors forums, we received positive feedback overall for our work. Still, Hilton HHonors FlyerTalk members said that we merged threads too quickly. Except in obvious situations, the Hilton HHonors forum moderators now wait anywhere from a few days to a couple of weeks before merging threads, and this policy seems to have worked.
By the way, the topic of merging threads in the Hilton HHonors forum has led to this “gem” in the The Merged Merged Threads Thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hilton-hhonors/746044-merged-merged-threads-thread.html):The Too many merged threads!!! thread was merged with the Merged threads thread, thus the The Merged Merged Threads Thread emerged as a result of merging the two merged thread threads.
This has got to be one of my most painful moments as a FlyerTalk moderator...
Regards,
Canarsie
Co-Moderator, Hilton forum
I will be the first to admit that the policies we moderators have in the Hilton HHonors forum — which were created as a result of the feedback we receive — will not work in every forum. However, it is a study of what can happen when moderators and FlyerTalk members work together to create as close to the optimal experience as possible.
I believe that “mega threads” would not be as much of a problem if the Search function within a thread of the vBulletin bulletin board software were more powerful and faster, but that is simply my opinion.
Sweet Willie
Dec 19, 10, 5:58 pm
...the one issue of feedback I received overwhelmingly is that there were too many threads pertaining to similar Hilton HHonors properties.
one of the prime reasons FOR mega threads!!:-:
I believe that “mega threads” would not be as much of a problem if the Search function within a thread of the vBulletin bulletin board software were more powerful and faster...+100^
tcook052
Dec 19, 10, 6:14 pm
Well I posted a link to this discussion in the UA forum but it disappeared within an hour.
Quite rightly IMHO as it's a discussion that belongs here not there or on other forums.
kokonutz
Dec 19, 10, 6:59 pm
Quite rightly IMHO as it's a discussion that belongs here not there or on other forums.
I agree that the discussion belongs here. But certainly deleting the link is going to keep eyes of those who have an opinion on the matter off of this thread. Which, imho, is :td:.
When I was on the TB I proactively posted in relevant forums about discussions taking place here so that the posters who were most affected by TB decisions had an opportunity for input. @:-)
Moderator2
Dec 19, 10, 8:06 pm
Let's stay focused on the topic. The TalkBoard does not regulate moderation, consequently this thread should not make reference to any previous specific moderation actions. The subject certainly might call for macro discussion of historic activity, but that's the limit.
magic111
Dec 19, 10, 8:16 pm
..I will be the first to admit that the policies we moderators have in the Hilton HHonors forum — which were created as a result of the feedback we receive — will not work in every forum. However, it is a study of what can happen when moderators and FlyerTalk members work together to create as close to the optimal experience as possible.
I believe that “mega threads” would not be as much of a problem if the Search function within a thread of the vBulletin bulletin board software were more powerful and faster, but that is simply my opinion. Agree with Carnasie that what works in one forum may or may not work across the spectrum.
What has been done with the mega threads in the aadvantage forum (that were created by request from users) is to have hijacked the OP. With repetitive requests for answers on the same topical questions someone who does not do a search and finds their thread merged will come across the OP where all the relevant information is located. example (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/8091538-post1.html)
Nobody who is a regular user for the forum expects a relative newcomer to read the entire thread. In addition anyone who is a regular user doesn't expect to have the first couple pages filled with the same question[s] asked repetitively.
Ultimately I believe what each and everyone of us wants is to make the information available for users. How we go about it is going to be different based on the requests by users for the different fora.
Thanks for starting this thread as it is always useful to receive useful new ideas for attacking a problem from a different perspective.
Markie
Dec 19, 10, 11:14 pm
I think we should remember that not everyone is happy to post, and so may just read the mega-threads, find their answer and go away happy with an answer.
Personally I hope that the Ambassador programme will create a way that members can ask "new member type" questions without being told to do a search. Although a little unstructured - which is the nature of these things, the thread in Hyatt allows new members, or established members new to Hyatt, to ask questions which the 'old hands' just know the answers to.
I think it's been great and would love it rolled out across the whole board.
Informally in Star Alliance, there are a group of members who are answering our most popular question - 'Which Frequent Flyer Scheme should I join?'. There, members post about their flying patterns, and some other key questions, and other members post suggestions, discuss pros and cons, and help out people.
I think these two initatives, will help remove the Mega-threads issue by providing places to post.
kokonutz
Dec 20, 10, 7:40 am
I think we should remember that not everyone is happy to post, and so may just read the mega-threads, find their answer and go away happy with an answer.While the mega-thread phenomenon has been getting worse and worse, what motivated me to start this thread at this time is a story that a former-frequent poster told me over drinks recently. He came back to FT to find a specific answer to a specific question pertaining to upgrade status of a general member on same PNR. Unable to wade through the several mega-threads on upgrades that search returned he posted his specific question. Before anyone could reply it was moved to one of the several mega-threads that had little relevance to his specific question. There it went unanswered.
That's a serious problem as it renders FT useless to newbies and oldies alike!
I do agree that there is a time and a place for mega-threads. Hotel properties are a good example (although, in many instances they end up turning FT into TripAdvisor light). All questions about, say, a specific route too. But something as general as 'upgrades' is far too broad.
There is a TOS that requires threads to be on-topic, as I recall. This TOS is regularly violated by mega-threads which appear to my eyes to take any post containing a keyword (say, 'upgrade') and combining them into a single mega-thread whether the post has any relevance to other posts in that mega-thread or not. That's just lazy and it should be a TOS violation.
If the TOS on this matter is not specific enough, perhaps the TB should take a look at that TOS and consider making it more specific.
Cholula
Dec 20, 10, 7:56 am
Personally I hope that the Ambassador programme will create a way that members can ask "new member type" questions without being told to do a search. Although a little unstructured - which is the nature of these things, the thread in Hyatt allows new members, or established members new to Hyatt, to ask questions which the 'old hands' just know the answers to.
I think it's been great and would love it rolled out across the whole board.
I think this may well be the answer for members to ask a question without wading through mega-threads many of which are full of outdated information.
The so-called mega-threads can exist for historical purposes or for those with the time and inclination to wade through them. But if someone has a question of any type they'd like answered they can ask it in the Ambassador/"Newbie" threads.
I too would like to see this concept rolled out throughout FT as it has been an unqualified success in the AS Forum.
I don't see TB as having any active roll in controlling the merging of threads but they can champion the adoption of the Ambassador program.
Jenbel
Dec 20, 10, 8:18 am
Here's my problem with mega threads.
(I'm going to reference it with a thread which neatly shows the problem. This is not meant to be a dig at the forum mods, it's just one thread which I am aware of which shows one of the issues with hotel mega-threads).
This is a hotel thread about a hotel which hasn't been stayed in much. The thread commenced in 2003. Between 2003 - 2009, there were five posts in the thread, all of which asked questions about the property, and all of which went unanswered. As a public service (and it was entirely fortuitous I found this, I did a search for Bogota across FT and noticed there was a thread about the hotel I had stayed in), I posted a review of the hotel in 2009. So we've had 6 years of a thread ostensibly about a hotel, but in which there was no concrete information provided to those seeking information.
But of course, because there is a mega-thread, then everyone assumes that there will be information on the property in the thread, so unless they are particularly interested in it, they don't bother to read the thread and contribute answers to the questions. Then we get a bit of interest in it following my review, a few folks stay there, or admit to staying there, but by June, this year, we are back to having questions go unanswered again.
I would guess, on most forums, a thread with 0 replies would have some folks looking to see if they they could help out in some way. But a question in a mega-thread which goes unanswered is lost for ever... you have to be interested in the property to notice that someone needs help.
At the other end of the scale, the popular or well known hotels can spawn threads which are hundreds of posts long. If I'm looking for information on a particular aspect of a hotel (and not just a general review), I really don't want to read through hundreds of posts which are unrelated to my query. I'm almost forced to ask the question, which may have been asked before, because the information is not that easily found in a mega-thread. And of course, if no-one answers... I'm stuffed because the question might go easily unnoticed, or lost in the deluge.
Mega-threads can be great for storing information of a general nature about a particular property. But they are often not so great when it comes to being able to find very particular information, or sometimes get a question asked and answered. And that goes back to - what is the function of FT?
Canarsie
Dec 20, 10, 8:39 am
although, in many instances they end up turning FT into TripAdvisor lightHere's my problem with mega threads.
(I'm going to reference it with a thread which neatly shows the problem. This is not meant to be a dig at the forum mods, it's just one thread which I am aware of which shows one of the issues with hotel mega-threads).
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hilton-hhonors/130497-embassy-suites-hotel-bogota-rosales.htmlAs one of the forum moderators of the Hilton forum where that thread resides, I just researched your question — and no, I do not take what you posted as a “dig” at all. I am always open to constructive feedback.
I did a search for “Bogota” in the Hilton HHonors forum, and all I found was that one thread with content posted 13 times to it overall, including your trip report. Should that thread be split up right now into multiple threads?
Typically, the way the Hilton HHonors forum is set up is that each Hilton HHonors property — with the exception of threads with minimal content, such as with the example above — have a minimum of two threads, each with a different purpose: a main general thread for questions and answers, and a “trip reports and reviews” thread so that FlyerTalk members may instantly get the “Trip Advisor light” experience without wandering through the clutter of questions and comments not related to the experiences of FlyerTalk members.
Some threads, such as certain Hawai’i property threads, have multiple threads assigned to more specific topics because they are rather lengthy. It is all in the name of assisting FlyerTalk members with finding the information they need as quickly and as easily as possible.
Finally — and I have done this many times in the past — if FlyerTalk members contact me about certain content in an existing thread that should be a separate thread in and of itself, I am usually more than happy to split out that content into its own thread. Some FlyerTalk members will even suggest a title for that new thread, and I usually oblige with that suggestion unchanged.
As I posted earlier...I will be the first to admit that the policies we moderators have in the Hilton HHonors forum — which were created as a result of the feedback we receive — will not work in every forum. However, it is a study of what can happen when moderators and FlyerTalk members work together to create as close to the optimal experience as possible....which means that by working together, we can help improve the searching of information and data on FlyerTalk as much as possible within the limitations of the technology that currently powers FlyerTalk.
kokonutz
Dec 20, 10, 8:59 am
Here's my problem with mega threads.
(I'm going to reference it with a thread which neatly shows the problem. This is not meant to be a dig at the forum mods, it's just one thread which I am aware of which shows one of the issues with hotel mega-threads).
This is a hotel thread about a hotel which hasn't been stayed in much. The thread commenced in 2003. Between 2003 - 2009, there were five posts in the thread, all of which asked questions about the property, and all of which went unanswered. As a public service (and it was entirely fortuitous I found this, I did a search for Bogota across FT and noticed there was a thread about the hotel I had stayed in), I posted a review of the hotel in 2009. So we've had 6 years of a thread ostensibly about a hotel, but in which there was no concrete information provided to those seeking information.
But of course, because there is a mega-thread, then everyone assumes that there will be information on the property in the thread, so unless they are particularly interested in it, they don't bother to read the thread and contribute answers to the questions. Then we get a bit of interest in it following my review, a few folks stay there, or admit to staying there, but by June, this year, we are back to having questions go unanswered again.
I would guess, on most forums, a thread with 0 replies would have some folks looking to see if they they could help out in some way. But a question in a mega-thread which goes unanswered is lost for ever... you have to be interested in the property to notice that someone needs help.
At the other end of the scale, the popular or well known hotels can spawn threads which are hundreds of posts long. If I'm looking for information on a particular aspect of a hotel (and not just a general review), I really don't want to read through hundreds of posts which are unrelated to my query. I'm almost forced to ask the question, which may have been asked before, because the information is not that easily found in a mega-thread. And of course, if no-one answers... I'm stuffed because the question might go easily unnoticed, or lost in the deluge.
Mega-threads can be great for storing information of a general nature about a particular property. But they are often not so great when it comes to being able to find very particular information, or sometimes get a question asked and answered. And that goes back to - what is the function of FT?
I confess that when I am faced with this situation I often resort to PMing a few posters who have clearly stayed at a property several times with specific questions because, as you note, few people bother to visit a generic hotel thread unless they just stayed or they just booked a stay, so specific questions posted in a mega hotel thread often go unanswered.
Not an elegant solution, but it works for me in the short term even as it further erodes the usefulness of FT as information is shared by PM rather than on the public boards.
pjoalfa
Dec 20, 10, 9:05 am
Clearly it's a complicated issue with many pros and cons on both sides. I certainly see the utility of megathreads, but yes I do think some fora are megathread happy.
I'd like to +1 on the most serious (imho) issue with the megathreads, and that is that posts that get merged very quickly often go completely unanswered. Perhaps a delay on merges would be the solution in many cases?
A great benefit of FT is the fact that with so many users reading constantly one can usually post a question and have a virtually instant, knowledgeable, response to your issue and often while one is still in the midst of said issue.
Instant burial in a megathread pretty much kills this "feature" of FT. Honestly, I have to be very interested in a topic to dive into a 200 page thread.
jackal
Dec 20, 10, 10:29 am
I am continuing to read this thread with interest and greatly appreciate specific ideas about what the TalkBoard can do within its purview to keep the membership happy.
However, I suggest the following two posts would be quite appropriately merged into http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hilton-hhonors/746044-merged-merged-threads-thread.html, which could, of course, then be renamed into The Merged Merged Threads Thread [Merged].
:p
Here's my problem with mega threads.
(I'm going to reference it with a thread which neatly shows the problem. This is not meant to be a dig at the forum mods, it's just one thread which I am aware of which shows one of the issues with hotel mega-threads).
This is a hotel thread about a hotel which hasn't been stayed in much. The thread commenced in 2003. Between 2003 - 2009, there were five posts in the thread, all of which asked questions about the property, and all of which went unanswered. As a public service (and it was entirely fortuitous I found this, I did a search for Bogota across FT and noticed there was a thread about the hotel I had stayed in), I posted a review of the hotel in 2009. So we've had 6 years of a thread ostensibly about a hotel, but in which there was no concrete information provided to those seeking information.
But of course, because there is a mega-thread, then everyone assumes that there will be information on the property in the thread, so unless they are particularly interested in it, they don't bother to read the thread and contribute answers to the questions. Then we get a bit of interest in it following my review, a few folks stay there, or admit to staying there, but by June, this year, we are back to having questions go unanswered again.
I would guess, on most forums, a thread with 0 replies would have some folks looking to see if they they could help out in some way. But a question in a mega-thread which goes unanswered is lost for ever... you have to be interested in the property to notice that someone needs help.
At the other end of the scale, the popular or well known hotels can spawn threads which are hundreds of posts long. If I'm looking for information on a particular aspect of a hotel (and not just a general review), I really don't want to read through hundreds of posts which are unrelated to my query. I'm almost forced to ask the question, which may have been asked before, because the information is not that easily found in a mega-thread. And of course, if no-one answers... I'm stuffed because the question might go easily unnoticed, or lost in the deluge.
Mega-threads can be great for storing information of a general nature about a particular property. But they are often not so great when it comes to being able to find very particular information, or sometimes get a question asked and answered. And that goes back to - what is the function of FT?
As one of the forum moderators of the Hilton forum where that thread resides, I just researched your question — and no, I do not take what you posted as a “dig” at all. I am always open to constructive feedback.
I did a search for “Bogota” in the Hilton HHonors forum, and all I found was that one thread with content posted 13 times to it overall, including your trip report. Should that thread be split up right now into multiple threads?
Typically, the way the Hilton HHonors forum is set up is that each Hilton HHonors property — with the exception of threads with minimal content, such as with the example above — have a minimum of two threads, each with a different purpose: a main general thread for questions and answers, and a “trip reports and reviews” thread so that FlyerTalk members may instantly get the “Trip Advisor light” experience without wandering through the clutter of questions and comments not related to the experiences of FlyerTalk members.
Some threads, such as certain Hawai’i property threads, have multiple threads assigned to more specific topics because they are rather lengthy. It is all in the name of assisting FlyerTalk members with finding the information they need as quickly and as easily as possible.
Finally — and I have done this many times in the past — if FlyerTalk members contact me about certain content in an existing thread that should be a separate thread in and of itself, I am usually more than happy to split out that content into its own thread. Some FlyerTalk members will even suggest a title for that new thread, and I usually oblige with that suggestion unchanged.
As I posted earlier......which means that by working together, we can help improve the searching of information and data on FlyerTalk as much as possible within the limitations of the technology that currently powers FlyerTalk.
Sagy
Dec 20, 10, 1:40 pm
I have always viewed many merged threads as being in one of three categories (there might be more):
Multiple threads on the same subject being created at once (e.g. after announcement for an airline multiple people started a thread on the announcement). IMO, this is an easy case the thread should be merged.
A repeat question/subject whose past thread has had no activity for weeks (ten?) or more. If the older thread is short (under 40 posts?), I don't think that merging will have a negative impact. However, in cases when the older thread is a "mega thread" there is a good reason to wait for at least week before merging. Maybe the right answer is not to merged or to merged after the discussion has slowed down.
A common repeat question/subject (e.g. will my upgrade clear). I cases in which it is the answer is clearly in the older thread I think that a pointer to the answer and a lock of the new thread might be a reasonable solution. In cases when the new thread has a some twist then merging might be the right answer, but I would still advise a short waiting period (a day?) before the merge.
I also think that if finding the older thread plus the time to find the answer in that thread takes an expert more than a few minutes then there is a chance that a new thread might be needed. After all, one of the purposes of FT is to enable people to get answers, if keep the forum organized hurts this goal then the organization method should be questioned.
kokonutz
Dec 20, 10, 2:04 pm
I have always viewed many merged threads as being in one of three categories (there might be more):
Multiple threads on the same subject being created at once (e.g. after announcement for an airline multiple people started a thread on the announcement). IMO, this is an easy case the thread should be merged.
A repeat question/subject whose past thread has had no activity for weeks (ten?) or more. If the older thread is short (under 40 posts?), I don't think that merging will have a negative impact. However, in cases when the older thread is a "mega thread" there is a good reason to wait for at least week before merging. Maybe the right answer is not to merged or to merged after the discussion has slowed down. A common repeat question/subject (e.g. will my upgrade clear). I cases in which it is the answer is clearly in the older thread I think that a pointer to the answer and a lock of the new thread might be a reasonable solution. In cases when the new thread has a some twist then merging might be the right answer, but I would still advise a short waiting period (a day?) before the merge.
I also think that if finding the older thread plus the time to find the answer in that thread takes an expert more than a few minutes then there is a chance that a new thread might be needed. After all, one of the purposes of FT is to enable people to get answers, if keep the forum organized hurts this goal then the organization method should be questioned.[my emphasis]
This seems like a good start at least. There was a pretty specific upgrade question asked in the UA forum, but the answer was general in nature. It was less than an hour before the thread had been mega-threaded.
Since it was an utter newbie asking the question there is a possibility that he or she will never even be able to FIND his or her question again now that it's in the mega-thread. That's terribly, terribly unhelpful and frankly quite a rude way to treat a new customer.
nerd
Dec 20, 10, 3:35 pm
That said, I do believe it's a huge probelm that's not been adequately addressed. I remember a complaint to Randy a while back & he had said (and I'm about 99.9% certain I read this or heard him say it, but I could be wrong) that the majority of the mergers/consolidated threads were due to member requests - I'm not sure that I believe that, but it's a problem. He mentioned it once in a reply to me. I find it very hard to believe, given that some forums, of similar size, have literally 10x more [merged] threads than do others.
After all, factually it is overwhelmingly the members of FlyerTalk that recommend that threads are merged. Come on, give the members their due!
From: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/suggestions/1132358-overzealous-moderators.html
nsx
Dec 20, 10, 4:51 pm
However, in cases when the older thread is a "mega thread" there is a good reason to wait for at least week before merging. Maybe the right answer is not to merged or to merged after the discussion has slowed down.
In a busy forum, it's difficult to keep track of all these threads for a week. If the software provided a "merge after specified time delay" feature, I'm confident that moderators would use it this way. However the current software has no such capability. I believe it's on the wish list, but I don't expect to see it added.
In the meantime, I suggest the following work-around. The poster of any question on a mega-thread topic promises in the OP that he himself will alert the moderator in one week to merge his thread. As a moderator, I would definitely honor a request to delay merging if the poster promised to alert me a week later. That way it's easy to handle, provided that the OP keeps his promise.
DeaconFlyer
Dec 20, 10, 5:01 pm
In a busy forum, it's difficult to keep track of all these threads for a week. If the software provided a "merge after specified time delay" feature, I'm confident that moderators would use it this way. However the current software has no such capability. I believe it's on the wish list, but I don't expect to see it added.
In a busy forum, a post will be long gone (past page 2) after a week. And if it's not, that means that lots of people have been posting in it, indicating that it is a topic with a lot of interest, and probably shouldn't be merged anyways.
In the meantime, I suggest the following work-around. The poster of any question on a mega-thread topic promises in the OP that he himself will alert the moderator in one week to merge his thread. As a moderator, I would definitely honor a request to delay merging if the poster promised to alert me a week later. That way it's easy to handle, provided that the OP keeps his promise.
Ha...most threads on common topics are started by relatively new posters. Do you really think they will know to make a "promise" along with their question?
kokonutz
Dec 21, 10, 7:09 am
In a busy forum, a post will be long gone (past page 2) after a week. And if it's not, that means that lots of people have been posting in it, indicating that it is a topic with a lot of interest, and probably shouldn't be merged anyways.
Ha...most threads on common topics are started by relatively new posters. Do you really think they will know to make a "promise" along with their question?
Both excellent points. The only time a thread should be mega-threaded is if the conversation about the OP evolves into a generic conversation that is already being discussed in a (narrowly focused!) mega-thread. Otherwise it should be left to find its own way or die a natural death.
And if there IS already a conversation specific to the OP in an existing thread then the correct course would be to lock the new thread with a link to the existing pertinent thread.
I realize this might require a little more work by moderators, and that they are unpaid (although not always uncompensated), but mega-threading is killing the functionality of FT. It has to be fixed.
ozstamps
Dec 25, 10, 5:50 pm
While the mega-thread phenomenon has been getting worse and worse, what motivated me to start this thread at this time is a story that a former-frequent poster told me over drinks recently. He came back to FT to find a specific answer to a specific question pertaining to upgrade status of a general member on same PNR. Unable to wade through the several mega-threads on upgrades that search returned he posted his specific question. Before anyone could reply it was moved to one of the several mega-threads that had little relevance to his specific question. There it went unanswered.
That's a serious problem as it renders FT useless to newbies and oldies alike!
I do agree that there is a time and a place for mega-threads. Hotel properties are a good example (although, in many instances they end up turning FT into TripAdvisor light). All questions about, say, a specific route too. But something as general as 'upgrades' is far too broad.
There is a TOS that requires threads to be on-topic, as I recall. This TOS is regularly violated by mega-threads which appear to my eyes to take any post containing a keyword (say, 'upgrade') and combining them into a single mega-thread whether the post has any relevance to other posts in that mega-thread or not. That's just lazy and it should be a TOS violation.
If the TOS on this matter is not specific enough, perhaps the TB should take a look at that TOS and consider making it more specific.
As has been pointed out earlier on this thread, the United Forum seems the main culprit here.
I am not interested in what UA web support said or did in 2005 etc.
Ask a very specific question about the United website, and that is where it will end up buried today - as post 6,548, and never get a response.
I almost never post there, and am still a 1K after 10 years. Many others tell me the same story .. they just simply do not bother any more.
If that is good for FT .. well others with skin in the game can make that call.
However I can, totally free of charge, condense the UA forum down to three threads if that will assist anyone. :D
Will save everyone a ton of time. Few members will read or post anything of course, but gee think how neat and tidy it will look. @:-)
Glen
.
nerd
Dec 29, 10, 5:24 pm
As has been pointed out earlier on this thread, the United Forum seems the main culprit here.
I am not interested in what UA web support said or did in 2005 etc.
Ask a very specific question about the United website, and that is where it will end up buried today - as post 6,548, and never get a response.
I almost never post there, and am still a 1K after 10 years. Many others tell me the same story .. they just simply do not bother any more.
If that is good for FT .. well others with skin in the game can make that call.
However I can, totally free of charge, condense the UA forum down to three threads if that will assist anyone. :D
Will save everyone a ton of time. Few members will read or post anything of course, but gee think how neat and tidy it will look. @:-)
Yeah, the megathreads are going to be the death of FT.
The TB, as our repesentatives, needs to take action before we lose any more valuable contributors!
tom911
Dec 29, 10, 7:25 pm
The TB, as our repesentatives, needs to take action before we lose any more valuable contributors!
How can they take action, though, if the moderators don't need to follow any policies they adopt? I think you're really going to have to run this by the new Community Director and get her to provide some type of direction to the moderators in place of the Talk Board. I can't see any other workaround.
kokonutz
Dec 29, 10, 7:55 pm
How can they take action, though, if the moderators don't need to follow any policies they adopt? I think you're really going to have to run this by the new Community Director and get her to provide some type of direction to the moderators in place of the Talk Board. I can't see any other workaround.
The TB are in charge of the TOS. Change the TOS to limit, for example, adding off-topic posts to years-old posts.
Sagy
Dec 29, 10, 8:05 pm
For starters, unless requested by the OP, how about stopping the merging of threads if the time frame between the last post in one and the first post in the second is more than x months (x=2)?
Basically, if a thread had no activity for 2 months, don't revive it due to a merge.
SkiAdcock
Dec 29, 10, 8:17 pm
For starters, unless requested by the OP, how about stopping the merging of threads if the time frame between the last post in one and the first post in the second is more than x months (x=2)?
Basically, if a thread had no activity for 2 months, don't revive it due to a merge.
I've still got a headache from trying to figure out what 'is is' when dealing w/ abstains & still have to vote on that. But on to this topic...
While I personally agree that some megathreads (and folk can fill in the blanks on which threads & which forums, cuz it could apply to more than one ;)) are 'over-merged', there are times when merging some comes in handy yet the date between might be more than 2 months.
BTW - the ones I'm thinking of might or might not be considered megathreads; most likely not, but some might be such as which property (fill in the chain) is better in London? London always gets a gazillion same questions re: properties. Doesn't matter the chain.
Also, some forums have 'master threads' re: properties, and from what I can tell most FTers in those forums are ok w/ that.
There are other forums where many threads are merged prematurely in multiple folks' opinions, but is it a 'universal' problem? That is actually the question. If it isn't, TB probably shouldn't be involved. More so the mods, Community Director & IB.
Cheers.
tom911
Dec 29, 10, 8:44 pm
BTW - the ones I'm thinking of might or might not be considered megathreads; most likely not, but some might be such as which property (fill in the chain) is better in London? London always gets a gazillion same questions re: properties. Doesn't matter the chain.
Look at it from a slightly different point of view. Suppose we had a thread titled "My Favorite London Hotel" and it has now accumulated 4,000 posts going back to 2007. Is the information that started that thread in 2007 still accurate and relavent after 4-5 years that it needs to appear on the front page of any forum? When does the information become stale or out of date? Can the older information be spun off separately into a different thread and a pointer just placed in the existing thread in case someone wants to check 2007 reviews?
I've previously pointed out that I see no value in threads about upgrades that cleared in 2007. Zero. I don't think upgrades from that year have any value to someone trying to determine if their upgrade will clear in 2011. Yet, we keep merging into that thread.
There are other forums where many threads are merged prematurely in multiple folks' opinions, [I]but is it a 'universal' problem?
It seems to happen more in UA. AA does some merging, but nothing on the scale of what we see on UA.
tcook052
Dec 29, 10, 9:57 pm
The TB are in charge of the TOS. Change the TOS to limit, for example, adding off-topic posts to years-old posts.
:confused: Isn't that already in the TOS?
Markie
Dec 29, 10, 11:11 pm
The TB are in charge of the TOS. Change the TOS to limit, for example, adding off-topic posts to years-old posts.
No we're not, the Moderators are.
kokonutz
Dec 30, 10, 8:32 am
No we're not, the Moderators are.
Huh. Was that power ceded willingly to by the TB or did the mods simply take it over due to TB inactivity?
Certainly in the past the TB has made recommendations to modify the TOS:
In an effort to provide maximum member input into the content and organization of FlyerTalk, a member-elected Board (TalkBoard) was created and empowered with the task of making recommendations with regard to the management, organization and content of FlyerTalk. These recommendations, while just recommendations to the Host* of FlyerTalk, serve as an important foundation for the structure and growth of FlyerTalk.
This question CLEARLY falls under the category 'organization and content of flyertalk'
Although I can understand your confusion since your perspective is both as a poster AND a moderator (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1161130-proposed-amend-tb-guidelines-tb-members-take-leave-absence-moderator-duty-2.html). :p ;)
Jenbel
Dec 30, 10, 10:16 am
TB also changed the TOS with respect to the inclusion of images in posts. I still maintain TOS amendments should only occur with mod buy-in.. but they can recommend the TOS be amended and Randy/Carol can accept that recommendation.
B747-437B
Dec 30, 10, 11:32 am
Huh. Was that power ceded willingly to by the TB or did the mods simply take it over due to TB inactivity?
Or do the mods with multiple hats simply not realise that their chinese walls aren't being particularly effective?
seanthepilot
Jan 1, 11, 10:27 am
This is an interesting and timely thread. As we enter a new era of FlyerTalk, it's important to remember that what once worked very well, may not work in the new 'evolved' FT.
Now, I want to be clear that I respect the work that the moderators in that forum do. It's a better forum with their involvement than without it. I also appreciate that they have autonomy to manage their assigned forum with whatever they feel is in the best interests of members at large.
Example: Website problem threads...
In certain instances it feels like we are sweeping the dust under the carpet, like in the case of a airline websites' technical problem thread (AC, UA, fill in the blanks). Since said airline will not fix the problems, the number of threads in the course of a year that complain about the various issues are many.
In my opinion, we have a better chance of seeing these ongoing problems resolved by leting each thread stand on its own. There's a saying "out of sight, out of mind". Just because it's tidier in one merged thread, doesn't mean it will be the most effective way for FTers to see issues resolved.
Indeed - the UA forum has become a desert of megathreads. Although UA is the airline I fly the most, I find myself checking out other fora most of the time. In the UA forum, a lot of informative or interesting posts either get buried immediately or never get posted because many members don't even bother anymore. What will happen when this forum is merged with the CO forum doesn't even bear contemplating.
That is quite telling. At least it is some quantitative data to help explain the sense I was getting that UA forum is becoming quite useless with all the merging going on.
I am still a supporter of mega threads in certain instances. But in the case of the some forums, they are one of the reasons that push me away from participating in it.
In the case of the UA forum, I place more of the blame on the forum regulars, not the moderators. Recognize that many forum contributors are to tempermental and too territorial. I couldn't believe my eyes today when, in the above mentioned UA thread where a long time luker complained, ten year members were trashing the OP telling him what type of participation they should make before they would consider the new member a person worthy of listening to. I'm glad I didn't get an earful of 'talking to' when I changed from lurking to posting. I was embarrased for FT just reading it. Some members consider other people's conduct their business and rudely covey the feeling.
In a busy forum, a post will be long gone (past page 2) after a week. And if it's not, that means that lots of people have been posting in it, indicating that it is a topic with a lot of interest, and probably shouldn't be merged anyways.
Agreed. BRAVO!
Both excellent points. The only time a thread should be mega-threaded is if the conversation about the OP evolves into a generic conversation that is already being discussed in a (narrowly focused!) mega-thread. Otherwise it should be left to find its own way or die a natural death.
....but mega-threading is killing the functionality of FT. It has to be fixed.
Once again, I thank those who dare to convey these thoughts, that I have shared for sometime, but wasn't about to bring up myself.
I still maintain TOS amendments should only occur with mod buy-in.. but they can recommend the TOS be amended and Randy/Carol can accept that recommendation.
This sounds good on paper. But the mods (me included) get too emotionally tied to their forums. I think the mods could be consulted, but it should stop there. As moderators, we do not yet hold the "elder statesman" type of attitude that would be needed to accept this responsibility.
ldsant
Jan 1, 11, 6:59 pm
I don't understand why things can't be 'archived' e.g., from 18 months or greater they are archived but out of site (still searchable but not part of these huge threads where people can't find anything anyway). Most software programs have this or it should be able to be programmed rather easily.
Most travel information that people are looking for is relevant NOT from 5 years ago; but from the last year or so. I KNOW that you can search for the latest threads, but what if somebody is new and don't know that "feature" is available?
Since moderators rarely, if ever, send a note to a poster letting them know that their post is deleted/moved/etc. I agree with others that the idea of having threads "active" for at least 2 - 3 days before being merged might be a better way to handle things rather than just automatically merging into one big long thread. As others have mentioned, I find that I too, post less and visit certain forums less. Since FT's profits are based on the number of visits/posts/clicks, it would seem that from a business perspective this should be resolved to stop folks from leaving as they are.
Why can't this be voted on and/or done?
tom911
Jan 1, 11, 8:24 pm
I couldn't believe my eyes today when, in the above mentioned UA thread where a long time luker complained, ten year members were trashing the OP telling him what type of participation they should make before they would consider the new member a person worthy of listening to.
Was that the thread where a poster with 1 post complained about too much noise on the UA forum? It does take some nerve to complain about how the forum is being run when you've never contributed a single piece of information to it and your first post is a complaint about other members posting habits.
tom911
Jan 1, 11, 8:38 pm
I don't understand why things can't be 'archived' e.g., from 18 months or greater they are archived but out of site (still searchable but not part of these huge threads where people can't find anything anyway). Most software programs have this or it should be able to be programmed rather easily.
That's the direction I'd like to see across all FT. One moderator upthread has suggested leaving a new thread in place a few days, and then merging if needed at that point. I think a lot of these threads would just scroll back a few pages and die a natural death on their own if left untouched. Instead, they get merged with a megathread which keeps getting bigger and bigger, and in a lot of those cases their post does not contribute any new additional information.
Today, for instance, a poster asked about UA UGS status and I referred him to the existing megathread that started in 2003 (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus/111089-united-global-services-status-qualification-benefits-etc-merged.html). That has to be one of the oldest megathreads I've ran across. Surely the information from 2003 is not as accurate at the information from 2010 or 2011. That thread now has 1,458 posts covering 9 years now. Do we need to know about UGS qualifications in 2003? 2004? 2005? Does anyone really care what was going on in those years or want to wade through it to find material from a more recent time?
As I don't think the Talk Board can address this, I'm hoping the new Community Director, if she opens a forum for discussion, can make this one of the first issues she offers the moderators direction on, at least to lessen the load on the Internet Brands servers, if for no other reason.
SFflyer123
Jan 1, 11, 9:13 pm
I agree with the OP. The merged threads have just turned me off the UA forum. The massive merging basically makes the thread just boring: it is essentially the same few megathreads up there every time I check. Nothing new, nothing fresh, nothing exciting. Just a bunch of the same old megathreads up there.
That being said, however, I've accepted it. I no long open the megathreads to read; I only use them to ask questions now. Some megathreads I am interested in, so I'll open those, but for the most part, I just ignore the megathreads and never click on them.
beaubo
Jan 2, 11, 3:50 pm
The 'market' usually does a sufficient job in determining the short, medium and long term value of a given thread.
* if enough people respond to a thread keeping it on page 1 or 2, that is a solid indication that the OP or the responses are relevant/compelling/interesting enough to allow it to remain unmerged
* at some point, the thread will lose its momentum at which point, it will fall off of page 1 or 2 and then moderator discretion can kick in about merging into appropriate mega-thread.
* agree that mega-threads should be truncated to include only 12-18 months of posts, with rest of posts being searchable, but archived separately.
SkiAdcock
Jan 2, 11, 5:36 pm
The 'market' usually does a sufficient job in determining the short, medium and long term value of a given thread.
* if enough people respond to a thread keeping it on page 1 or 2, that is a solid indication that the OP or the responses are relevant/compelling/interesting enough to allow it to remain unmerged
* at some point, the thread will lose its momentum at which point, it will fall off of page 1 or 2 and then moderator discretion can kick in about merging into appropriate mega-thread.
* agree that mega-threads should be truncated to include only 12-18 months of posts, with rest of posts being searchable, but archived separately.
Agree 100% w/ this.
Cheers. Sharon
nsx
Jan 2, 11, 5:37 pm
The 'market' usually does a sufficient job in determining the short, medium and long term value of a given thread.
* if enough people respond to a thread keeping it on page 1 or 2, that is a solid indication that the OP or the responses are relevant/compelling/interesting enough to allow it to remain unmerged
* at some point, the thread will lose its momentum at which point, it will fall off of page 1 or 2 and then moderator discretion can kick in about merging into appropriate mega-thread.
* agree that mega-threads should be truncated to include only 12-18 months of posts, with rest of posts being searchable, but archived separately.
I agree that this approach is superior, but I realize that it's asking a lot of work from moderators. It's not simple to keep track of every one of these new threads in order to merge them with mega-threads when they lose momentum. curbcrusher and I could accomplish this in the Southwest forum, but I doubt we could do so at ten times the number of posts per day.
I hope that the software improves in the future to allow delayed-action thread merges. That would simplify managing these threads.
SkiAdcock
Jan 2, 11, 5:57 pm
I agree that this approach is superior, but I realize that it's asking a lot of work from moderators. It's not simple to keep track of every one of these new threads in order to merge them with mega-threads when they lose momentum. curbcrusher and I could accomplish this in the Southwest forum, but I doubt we could do so at ten times the number of posts per day.
I hope that the software improves in the future to allow delayed-action thread merges. That would simplify managing these threads.
I would suggest that if they lose momentum that they're going to drop pretty far down in the pages listed in the first place & thus might not need merging into the mega-threads.
Truthfully for people doing searches on topics, having different threads w/ titles that might match what they're looking for is probably better.
Speaking for myself, if I have a question & do a search & it pulls up a megathread, odds are after a bit of reading I'll probably throw in the towel & just not bother at that point, which kind of defeats the purpose of trying to get information.
Earlier this year I started a thread in a forum (fill in the blank re: which forum it was ;)) re: needing help on a specific issue & had a very short timeline to get the response. Because my initial line mentioned where the problem came up, it got shunted to that megathread - even though the problem & what I was asking for advice/needed help on had nothing to do w/ the thread it got merged into - and the merge happened 10 minutes after I posted. We're not talking a long time - we're talking 10 minutes for crikey's sake!
If my problem had to do w/ where the thread got shunted to, I would have understood it. But the mod just read the first line, didn't read the entire post, & shunted it to a thread where it wouldn't get a response & had nothing to do w/ that thread. And I ended up having to PM a bunch of FTers fast to try & get a response. To me that's an example of where a megathread merge should not have occurred.
Ok, that's my example as a regular FT member & where I think the megamerge thing failed.
As a TB member, since the problem isn't universal across all forums & does involve mods I'm not sure what TB specifically is supposed to do (although I'm willng to listen to different viewpoints) & think it may be something the CD might want/need to chime in on here, or at some point at an upcoming mod meeting.
OVMV. Cheers. Sharon
tom911
Jan 2, 11, 8:17 pm
I thought the 2003 megathread on UA was one of the older ones. Today I saw one from 2002 that was bumped up and had posts merged into it.
For comparison, a similar topic on AA had 9 posts and was not merged with any threads from 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2009, or 2010.
UA 2002 thread: It's so depressing to see that zero.... [Merged Threads] (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus/96472-its-so-depressing-see-zero-merged-threads.html)
AA 2011 thread: Account "YTD" now reset to 0/0/0 (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-aadvantage/1166788-account-ytd-now-reset-0-0-0-a.html)
Again, I don't see what value comes to any forum by dredging up a megathread from 9 years ago. Both the UA and AA threads have rolled back to page 3. If the UA thread hadn't been merged it would probably be even further back.
As a start, can we just apply the TOS to these megathreads? We have to start somewhere. I recognize that direction will need to come from the Community Director.
Avoid Bumping Very Old Threads - link to this guideline (http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#q77)
Unless there is a compelling reason, avoid bumping threads that are more than two years old. Often the information is out-dated and it clogs the forums, making it difficult to find current threads.
iluv2fly
Jan 3, 11, 12:20 am
I thought the 2003 megathread on UA was one of the older ones. Today I saw one from 2002 that was bumped up and had posts merged into it.
UA 2002 thread: It's so depressing to see that zero.... [Merged Threads] (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus/96472-its-so-depressing-see-zero-merged-threads.html)
I now feel a need to respond to this particular post.
Do you have moderator capabilities? Do you have access to our database? Can you see what was merged? I just checked and nothing was merged into that thread this year. True, it was brought back to life by a member, but nothing was merged into that thread since it was brought back .
And this particular thread - I wouldn't consider this a mega-thread. True, it's 12 pages long, but it is not something that is 50 or 100 pages long. And it's more of a "friendly" thread - similar to those Happy Birthday or Flyertalk Tags Really Work threads in CommunityBuzz! (not picking on CB, believe you me) - which are more for fun than information.
I told myself not to get involved in this thread, but when someone who obviously does not know what he is talking about starts to post inaccurate information, I have to respond. Please get your facts right before you decide to write untruths and try to "pile on". It's very obvious that you have a problem with one/some/all of the UA Mods, but this is certainly not the way to try to help resolve the issue, of which the UA Mods are aware.
seanthepilot
Jan 3, 11, 12:38 am
I would suggest that if they lose momentum that they're going to drop pretty far down in the pages listed in the first place & thus might not need merging into the mega-threads.
...Earlier this year I started a thread in a forum (fill in the blank re: which forum it was ;)) re: needing help on a specific issue & had a very short timeline to get the response. Because my initial line mentioned where the problem came up, it got shunted to that megathread - even though the problem & what I was asking for advice/needed help on had nothing to do w/ the thread it got merged into - and the merge happened 10 minutes after I posted. We're not talking a long time - we're talking 10 minutes for crikey's sake!
If my problem had to do w/ where the thread got shunted to, I would have understood it. But the mod just read the first line, didn't read the entire post, & shunted it to a thread where it wouldn't get a response & had nothing to do w/ that thread. And I ended up having to PM a bunch of FTers fast to try & get a response. To me that's an example of where a megathread merge should not have occurred.
For comparison, a similar topic on AA had 9 posts and was not merged with any threads from 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2009, or 2010.
UA 2002 thread: It's so depressing to see that zero.... [Merged Threads] (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus/96472-its-so-depressing-see-zero-merged-threads.html)
AA 2011 thread: Account "YTD" now reset to 0/0/0 (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-aadvantage/1166788-account-ytd-now-reset-0-0-0-a.html)
Again, I don't see what value comes to any forum by dredging up a megathread from 9 years ago. Both the UA and AA threads have rolled back to page 3. If the UA thread hadn't been merged it would probably be even further back.
I agree that there is no need to merge as many posts. That a delayed merge is as bad as a speedy one. Let the thread die a natural death. ^
I'm guessing it's the busybody "Report Bad Post" happy members that are the issue here.
My opinion is just because somebody says it has to be moved to another forum or merged to another thread isn't reason enough.
Every act of moderation affects someone and also consumes time. If the OP wanted the seperate thread, I look for a reason to leave it, not move it. How do you all feel when your posts are moved or deleted? Newer members (and us old dogs too) don't always appreciate the 24 hour a days thoughts that it would be better blended with a 1500 post hodgepodge.
This brings us back to the concept of Overmoderation. It's by virture of wanting to be helpful. But the tides have shifted. And we need to respond to the ever evolving product that FT has become.
.
.
tom911
Jan 3, 11, 1:11 am
Do you have moderator capabilities? Do you have access to our database? Can you see what was merged? I just checked and nothing was merged into that thread this year. True, it was brought back to life by a member, but nothing was merged into that thread since it was brought back .
I do not have moderator capabilities. I saw a new post earlier today and thought it was merged into this thread. Clearly I was mistaken based on what you see and it was the poster that bumped the 2002 thread. Please accept my apology for making this error.
If you look at it from the other direction, though, it is a thread started 9 years ago, and I just don't see the value in bumping them up by even adding to it once a year when a forum is so busy. I know the UA forum used to be the busiest of FT, and that may be the case again now that the Travel Safety/Security forum has slowed down some in the last month. I just looked back and it takes 5 pages to cover the last 24 hours on that forum. For those with the default setting, they see 10 pages. That's a lot of material.
I think the merging of threads creates MORE work for the moderators and not less. If some of the newer threads that could be answered with one or two posts, or a link to an existing thread (not necessarily from a moderator, could be from another member), instead of merged with a bigger thread, there would be less work for all our moderators and they would scroll off the screen. This type of policy could apply across all of FT, though. We should not have a policy just for one or two forums.
It's very obvious that you have a problem with one/some/all of the UA Mods, but this is certainly not the way to try to help resolve the issue, of which the UA Mods are aware.
My problem is not with the moderators but rather with the megathreads (which I consider threads covering multiple years). A lot of those predate our current forum moderators even being in place and have taken on lives of their own. I have not mentioned any moderator by name, and have not done any research as to which moderators in any particular forum are merging into the megathreads. I'm not the only one that has posted links to them.
I appreciate the hard work our volunteer moderators do on a daily basis. I just think that whoever coordinates moderation, and we've pretty much decided that is not the Talk Board, needs to address a policy that covers ALL forums and megathreads (and that would include a definition of what a megathread is, as it may not match mine). To me it is more obvious on the UA forum compared to AA, the two main forums I post on, but there could be other airline forums with the same issue. I don't frequent Delta or Continental, for instance, so it's hard for me to comment what's going on there. They may have the same issues there, but no one from those forums has been along to post links here.
One problem we have is very few members here are aware there is a Talk Board forum, so you do end up with a lot of the same posters posting here over and over and you don't get the type of input you would see on a hotel or airline forum. We've been fortunate on this thread to have five Talk Board members participate which is a good response. I wonder if all the moderators even know this forum exists.
I'd like to see more moderators post their point of view on megathreads so we do have more input here. One poster previously told me that megathreads were not being discussed on the moderator forum.
What do you see as the solution for megathreads that cover multiple years?
We've heard from a few Talk Board members here, and members, but not a lot of moderators have offered their point of view. Is there some way to make your job easier when it relates to megathreads? Aren't there over 100 moderators now? What type of policy would work best across all the FT forums to make them easier to read for the members, and easier to manage for the moderators? There must be some ground in the middle we can all meet at.
Could it be as simple as letting new threads scroll past for a few days and never be seen again? What would work best across all forums?
Again, iluv2fly, my apologies for the incorrect information in the thread you cited above. I'll try not to make an error of that sort again.
jackal
Jan 3, 11, 2:38 am
One poster previously told me that megathreads were not being discussed on the moderator forum.
That was me.
Since that post, the subject has indeed been brought up in the private moderator forum and indeed is being discussed with vigor.
I am personally still investigating my own stance on megathreads, having only seen a few of the type discussed in this thread and not having developed any firm opinion on the matter prior to this.
I'm also looking at what exactly the TB's role should (or can, given the restriction on our mandate) be in this type of a situation, especially as it doesn't seem to be a problem across the entire board.
I am, however, watching this thread with great interest.
tom911
Jan 3, 11, 10:11 am
I'm glad to hear the topic is under discussion off-forum. I do think a lot of good suggestions have been made here as to strategies in looking at these types of threads, and I appreciate those members that have taken the time to post their thoughts on the issue for the Talk Board members, and for kokonutz for bringing up the issue for Talk Board's review. I also appreciate those Talk Board members who have taken the time to post their thoughts on the issue.
Moderator2
Jan 3, 11, 12:00 pm
The rhetoric has gotten too heated. Time for a break.
In the interim, please re-read kokonutz original posting. I doubt his goal was to get into macro moderation discussions. This should be about a board-wide policy adoption:
The point of FT is to be able to easily find information on frequency programs and get questions answered.
This core function is becoming difficult to the point of impossible due to the proliferation of mega-threads that have become as general as 'complaints about flight attendant service.' Come freaking on, I am supposed to dig through 15 50-post pages of such a thread to find out if there are one or two FAs on a certain aircraft type in FC? And that's just one example. Look around, the mega-threads are out of control.
Further, when questions are placed in mega-threads they often go unanswered. I'm not going to click on a 20 page thread to look at a general topic, even though I may have a specific answer to a specific question posed in a mega-thread rather than a stand-alone thread, where I would have clicked and provided input.
Some subjects certainly do call for mega-threads. But not NEARLY so many as exist in the major frequency program forums now.
Can the TB consider amending the TOS to limit the over-use of mega-threads?
They really are destroying the user experience on FT.
SanDiego1K
Jan 3, 11, 12:26 pm
Thanks to Moderator2 for closing this temporarily. With this note, I am closing it permanently.
Thank you everyone for your comments on this complicated issue. Some good thoughts have been shared here. Just as one dress size would never fit all women or one shirt size all men, one policy on thread mergers would never fit all forums. Thus, this really is a matter for each forum moderator team as it strives to organize information so that readers can most easily find it.
As you know, we have had a long-standing practice of separating moderator-related issues from TalkBoard issues. I have no intention of changing that practice as the new Community Director. The merging and handling of threads are clearly moderator issues, and, as such, not within the scope of Talkboard’s purview.
Should anyone have thoughts specific to a forum, please PM the forum moderators. Should anyone have more general thoughts not yet shared above, please direct them to me via Private Message.