***
***
Limiting the proliferation of new threads on similar topics improves forum readability for people whose interest is more focused. However this is a lot of work for the moderators. Having reliable extra sets of eyes reporting the need for merging threads is a huge help for the mods. My current co-moderator curbcrusher did this for me for years.
Writing as an
individual UA forum moderator, let me offer a few points, without wanting to influence the outcome of the OP's views:
1) We're an extremely active forum. Often an entire page of threads represents just two hours of forum activity and we'll often have 250+ readers and members on line. Members really want to discuss this airline's operations and programs!
2) We find that many posts cross over somewhat any standard set of topics; so no matter how broadly or finely one would create topic sub-headings, there will inevitably be some spillover of subjects discussed in a thread. We aim to the goals, among others, of keeping the discussion on topic and having the thread moving within a direction that will help members.
3)
Specifically as to nsx's point as to thread mergers, our members' wishes range the gamut from having no mergers ever to merging everything whenever possible. A number of members regularly let us know about merger candidates so we have no shortage of members to help us there. We seek to implement a merger protocol that will balance: the ability to find threads efficiently, the avoidance of too much clutter on this very busy forum, but also the recognition that some threads may present different enough variations justifying stand-alone status. It's definitely an art and judgment calls are involved.