This is interesting. I was getting peeved with how my posts wouldn't bunch together since I became a mod. Now I have to watch my sloppy ways more closely But I can see how this would be helpful for mods in many instances. I do agree with tonus though that I rely on new post notifications to get me back to a thread for response.

(May 21, 2014 at 10:35 pm)Luckie Wrote: This is interesting. I was getting peeved with how my posts wouldn't bunch together since I became a mod. Now I have to watch my sloppy ways more closely But I can see how this would be helpful for mods in many instances. I do agree with tonus though that I rely on new post notifications to get me back to a thread for response.

Same.

I didn't realise that we didn't get the auto [ hr ] as mods and have subsequently found myself having to double check I don't just keep quoting other users and getting multiple posts.

I actually like the system as it is.

(May 21, 2014 at 9:20 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(May 21, 2014 at 6:12 pm)Chas Wrote: What does that even mean? That's what I don't want to do.

What do you even mean? I seriously don't get your logic. How do replies lose context and impact? That's total nonsense. The post you just made was perfectly easy to understand, and it was to two people. Are you saying you would rather have the two responses separated into two posts. That are one after the other? What the fuck is the point of that? How does that make it any easier to understand. It just makes everything more cluttered and takes up additional space on the webpage that is totally unnecessary.

And what is the problem with two posts one after another? It offends your esthetics?

They are separate responses to separate posts.

Oh, now I see what you mean.

I actually like the way it is.

(May 22, 2014 at 2:03 pm)Chas Wrote: And what is the problem with two posts one after another? It offends your esthetics?

You still haven't explained why two posts is better than one. Other than the reason that one post offends your aesthetics...

Which I think is frankly ludicrous and hilariously hypocritical of you to make this argument.

Quote:They are separate responses to separate posts.

You can keep saying this, but it isn't a reason for having two posts one after the other. When you could just have one damn post.

This is going long.

Let me clarify things:
1. Multiposts in quick succession are folded together.
2. Staff accounts, by group membership, have that functionality disabled

The rationale for imposing multipost folding is not clear - it was made a while ago and predates myself.

There are arguments for it - folding N posts to
1 post certainly reduces database wastage, for example.

As has been pointed out, it breaks read new posts.

That isn't easy to fix - each user carries a list of the tail ids of each topic they read and the logic expects to see a difference to indicate new posts. The design of the software is inflexible, with high cost for modification and low barrier to mistakes.

As there is no pressing need to disable folding except for minor aesthetics and a penalty towards database usage if disabled, I fail to see the benefit in change for the sake of change.

Please do not think I am disregarding your input without due consideration.

No automerge = more work for mods to merge manually = more spam, chaos etc.

Well, I'm convinced. You guys know your stuff intimately. Although are you saying there's no way to make a timeout of newly automerged posts, to prompt the new posts button?

I haven't the slightest clue on the details obviously, just curious

(May 22, 2014 at 3:01 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(May 22, 2014 at 2:03 pm)Chas Wrote: And what is the problem with two posts one after another? It offends your esthetics?

You still haven't explained why two posts is better than one. Other than the reason that one post offends your aesthetics...

Which I think is frankly ludicrous and hilariously hypocritical of you to make this argument.

I gave reasons that are not esthetic - you are just too stupid to understand them.

Quote:

Quote:They are separate responses to separate posts.

You can keep saying this, but it isn't a reason for having two posts one after the other. When you could just have one damn post.

And you have no reason for there to be one.

---

(May 22, 2014 at 3:25 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: This is going long.

Let me clarify things:
1. Multiposts in quick succession are folded together.
2. Staff accounts, by group membership, have that functionality disabled

The rationale for imposing multipost folding is not clear - it was made a while ago and predates myself.

There are arguments for it - folding N posts to
1 post certainly reduces database wastage, for example.

As has been pointed out, it breaks read new posts.

That isn't easy to fix - each user carries a list of the tail ids of each topic they read and the logic expects to see a difference to indicate new posts. The design of the software is inflexible, with high cost for modification and low barrier to mistakes.

As there is no pressing need to disable folding except for minor aesthetics and a penalty towards database usage if disabled, I fail to see the benefit in change for the sake of change.

Please do not think I am disregarding your input without due consideration.

This is very easy to fix - turn the option off. If you are correct that the posts have been combined in the database, there will be no problem.

I think you are not giving it due consideration because you clearly don't understand my comment.

I explained that it is clearer if they are separate. You may or may not agree, but I think folding them together is purely someone's esthetic decision as it serves no function.

(May 23, 2014 at 10:40 am)Chas Wrote: I gave reasons that are not esthetic - you are just too stupid to understand them.

Coming from a guy who can't even spell aesthetic? Whatever bro.

---

(May 23, 2014 at 10:40 am)Chas Wrote: And you have no reason for there to be one.

The reasons have been explained throughout the thread. Less clutter, easier to deal with spammers...