forum.dlang.org thread lovers suggested change

H. S. Teoh hsteoh at quickfur.ath.cx
Fri Mar 9 18:50:47 PST 2012


On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 03:22:26AM +0100, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> After much use of the new NNTP reader I'd like to suggest a change
> that I hope other users of "Thread" may also desire.
> 
> The software is set up with this kind of hierarchy
> 
> Group List
>     Message List
>         Message
> 
> There are three views, Basic, Thread, Horizontal-split. To improve the
> experience of using Threads I would like to see the Message List to be
> in the same for as Basic.

I'm not sure what you're referring to, are you using the website
interface for the forums?


> Clicking on the descussion would bring you to the first post, but
> clicking the cool (30 new) brings you to the first new post (based on
> time or position, don't care).
> 
> The Horizontal-split would no longer include all of the descussions,
> only the one you are viewing.
> 
> Any opinions of those who also prefer threading over unorder reading?

1) Threading is a must to keep up with a high-volume forum like this
one.

2) Web forum interfaces suck. I've yet to see one that doesn't. (Doesn't
mean a good one can't be made though. I just haven't seen it yet.) I
personally use Mutt with the mailing list. Highly recommended. A real
NNTP reader like rn or tin is also recommended.

3) A *real* threading interface needs to show you the entire thread
*tree*, not just some randomly linearized form of it (like most web
interfaces do). Anything less than the full discussion tree will
inevitably bring confusion and disorder to the discussion. Like some
arbitrary 3-level hierarchy of messages.

4) A *real* threading interface must also allow replying to a specific
node in the tree (by setting References: and In-Reply-To: properly), not
just randomly tack on your response to the bottom of the thread, thus
breaking up the structure of the discussion and causing needless
confusion.

5) A *real* threading interface needs to let you manage subthreads in a
sane way. E.g., expand/collapse subtrees, hide a subtree or an entire
thread, mark a (sub)tree as read, etc..  Otherwise a large thread (with
complex branching structure) will become unnavigable, and people will be
liable to just post replies to random nodes at the bottom of the tree
instead of the subtree where it belongs, again breaking up the threading
structure and leading to general confusion.

Most people may or may not agree with everything I said. :-)


T

-- 
What doesn't kill me makes me stranger.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list