I understand the issue completely.
My objections to double / triple posting (i.e. the same person posting 2 or more times in a row) are as follows:
1) It's bad forum etiquette. If you are replying to a thread, your reply should contain all responses you want to include for the people that posted before you. That is why quotes display the username of the person you are quoting, and why merged posts put a solid line between them to make it clear that two or more posts became one. This has, by the way, been how we deal with double posting since as far a I remember. The auto merge feature just made our work easier.
2) It needlessly breaks up the conversation flow. We don't have a limit on post content, so you can fit your views into one post fine, then someone can respond, and you can respond again in turn.
3) Kudos should be given for good posts, not necessarily posts you agree with. Kudos doesn't mean you agree with the post, or certain parts of the post, etc. If you really want to show agreement with a specific part of the post, kudos it and make a response.
4) I don't buy the "serious" / "non-serious" mix issue. If you quote the person you are replying to, then it will be obvious that the replies are separate, especially if they are separated by a line as they were.
My objections to double / triple posting (i.e. the same person posting 2 or more times in a row) are as follows:
1) It's bad forum etiquette. If you are replying to a thread, your reply should contain all responses you want to include for the people that posted before you. That is why quotes display the username of the person you are quoting, and why merged posts put a solid line between them to make it clear that two or more posts became one. This has, by the way, been how we deal with double posting since as far a I remember. The auto merge feature just made our work easier.
2) It needlessly breaks up the conversation flow. We don't have a limit on post content, so you can fit your views into one post fine, then someone can respond, and you can respond again in turn.
3) Kudos should be given for good posts, not necessarily posts you agree with. Kudos doesn't mean you agree with the post, or certain parts of the post, etc. If you really want to show agreement with a specific part of the post, kudos it and make a response.
4) I don't buy the "serious" / "non-serious" mix issue. If you quote the person you are replying to, then it will be obvious that the replies are separate, especially if they are separated by a line as they were.
