Would sorting threads by most recent posting be better?

<p>I started a thread on Graduated Neutral Density Filters, on August 18th. I've just now posted a couple of test shots: with/without GND's. Now first off, it's very likely everyone's just bored stiff of my postings, but just in case there is some interest:</p>

<p>Due to Photo.net's chronological listing of threads, my recent posting to this oldish thread is likely to go unnoticed. I would think this setup encourages double posting, "follow up" threads, and the like.</p>

<p>If Photo.net were to go to a system where most recent postings are at the top of the list, I think it would encourage posters to stay within the original thread, keeping things more contiguous, and so on.</p>

<p>I'm very sure someone is going to weigh in shortly: explaining why all these whims can't be accomodated, that the photo.net architecture is chiseled in stone, and if I'm really unlucky: close the thread. But please, give it some thought?</p>

<p>It's an age old argument that can be successfully justified either way. The standard reasoning for why PN has historically displayed the forums the way that we have is because we always felt that having things pop up to the top would overly promote the endless "hot button" debates (Canon vs Nikon, Film Vs Digital, etc) while quickly pushing off the page less incendiary but equally valid (and likely more educational) threads and questions. It also keeps necro-posting to a minimum. There is little as pointless as watching someone jump into an argument that happened 8 years ago because they didn't read the date. But no matter what the reason, it's hard to argue that it hasn't worked and worked well for us.</p>

<p>That having been said, I've turned around on the subject over the past few years and actually included creating a "pop to the top" system for photo.net threads in my recent plans for the programmers. Somewhat ironically, it just keeps getting pushed down the list in favor of other things. The fact is that virtually every other large forum site out there has this sort of system and once people get that used to a particular way of seeing something (like a forum) you actually end up hurting participation by being the "odd man out". It's like being used to the linear PN style of forum display (which eventually became the default everywhere) and then running into some random old website that still uses the old school threaded display style. Terrible!</p>

<p>I have yet to come to a decision if I'm going to change the default site display (for new users and non-registered users) to be the "pop to the top" style or leave it as is. Either way, there will be an option for registered users to choose either style of display for themselves.</p>

<p>No, I do not know when this would be finished. Sometime before the end of time. Seriously though, it shouldn't take long, but we're in the middle of a bunch of other stuff that we're trying to get 'out the door' as it were.</p>

<p>I second the motion.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The fact is that virtually every other large forum site out there has this sort of system and once people get that used to a particular way of seeing something (like a forum) you actually end up hurting participation by being the "odd man out".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hi Josh, thanks for weighing in ;)</p>

<p>Yes, that's it in a nutshell. I also participate in CleanMPG a fair bit (for one), and they use what I suppose is boilerplate architecture: postings sorted by most-recent. There is also a page for unread posts: you go there and see any post that has been updated since your last visit. Very handy.</p>

<p>Anyway, I'm glad to hear the topic is under consideration. Thanks!</p>

<p>I strongly prefer keeping it the way it is. When I visit some of the other photo sites, what ends up happening is since they sort by last time the post was edited, so you end up only seeing the most popular posts, which by itself doesn't seem that bad until you realize that there's a lot of people posting updates just to keep the post alive. So you end up with a LOT of trash posts. One of the biggest reasons why PN is #1 to me is the quality of its forums. Josh and the moderators do a great job at keeping PN friendly and fresh.</p>

<p>One possibility to solve this is to display on the summary view both the create date and last update date, and allow people to sort by either. Or maybe treat recently updated summaries different - maybe a slightly different color treatment or something similar.</p>

<p>Josh - regarding people posting updates to posts 8 years old because they did not read the dates, I like how tripadvisor handles it. They now automatically close any post greater than 6 months old. Something to think about.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>There is also a page for unread posts: you go there and see any post that has been updated since your last visit. Very handy.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is something that is harder to do for us due to the way the backend of the site is designed. My plan there is to improve the "new answers" view of the forums as a version of the type of page you are talking about.</p>

<p>Another vote for the way it is. The former English "Digital Photography" (or whatever, how soon we forget) site used the "list by most recent post" system. It elevated the often obnoxious posts topics and posters at the expense of new questions and answers.</p>

<p>Perhaps there could be a choice of whichever people preferred as their personal default, as well as a button changing to the other when desired.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Perhaps there could be a choice of whichever people preferred as their personal default, as well as a button changing to the other when desired.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Awww....JDM....buddy....I know everyone is tired of hearing me talk, but I specifically address this in my post above.</p>

<p>JR: <em>"... I've turned around on the subject over the past few years and actually included creating a "pop to the top" system for photo.net threads in my recent plans for the programmers. ..."</em></p>

<p>THANK YOU, THANK YOU,<strong> THANK YOU! ! !<br /></strong></p>

<p>Whenever it happens, I'll be happy!</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I prefer the current system as then you see the initial post first then the answers as they arrive. One of the big pluses for me about PN is that it seems straightforward and intuitive with no <em>web-isms</em> suchas coloured backgrounds and fussy design. Please keep it simple - or at least keep the option to keep it simple.</p>

<p>I prefer it as it is now, in it's chronological order. I could imagine a possible advantage for a "Last post first" if most people would still be working from a slow dial-up but I gather most people here have fairly fast to blindingly fast connections nowadays. Either way, there is still the <End> and <Home> buttons that can be used. Often overlooked but very handy.</p>

<p>I was probably the biggest PITA asking for this. Making the view optional is the best of both worlds.</p>

<p>I'm anxious to see how well it works, on sites like airliners.net I liked it very much.</p>

<p>Thanks Josh.</p>

<p>oops, so you did.. Sorry.<br>

when I added that as an afterthought I was in the re-edit mode and couldn't see the other posts, too. :(</p>

I think a couple of people may be misunderstanding what is being discussed here. We're not talking about changing the

order in which replies to a question appear WITHIN a thread. We're talking about a thread with a new reply being placed

at the top of the forum index. It is just a different version od the standard sorting. Instead of sorting by original post time,

threads are sorted by time of last reply.

 

Once you click to view a thread, there won't be any difference.

<p>I'd rather see it as an option, with the default being the current system. Let users choose which version they prefer, but without altering the overall character of the site.</p>

<p>Most of the other sites I lurk on that default to prioritizing threads by most recently activity tend to be swamped with high angst, low value arguments, pushing the more informative, interesting and sane discussions and legitimate questions to the bottom. And there's a tendency for folks who are attracted primarily for the arguments and trolling to continually bump conflict oriented threads, unless there's a mechanism (a sort of anti-bump, like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imageboard"><em>sage</em></a> option on certain imageboards) to allow other members to keep a thread from hogging the top spot.</p>

<p>Even if individual users have the option to hide those conflict-driven threads, as long as the default setting prioritizes high-ragchew "versus" type threads it tends to change the character of an entire website. It would be akin to making photo.net's Off Topic Forum the highest visibility forum on the entire site, especially the most conflict oriented threads.</p>

<p>A relatively simple solution to the "sort by recent" dilemma:</p>

<p>Give users a list of all threads that had postings in the last _______ hours/days/?, where the user selects from a list of interval options, as is done in the Gallery already.</p>

<p>This capability already exists (obviously) on the site, although it may be accessing a different database than the one containing forum threads. The latter might be a slightly more complex problem since it's working with linked lists rather than individual posts.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

<p>I like the 'pop to the top' methodology. It allows us to see what topics have had a reply.</p>

<p>Yes, some posters will abuse it. The solution is to warn them, then BAN them. I'm a member of a military type forum and we kick abusers out without a thought. Soon the community is well behaved and the trolls find other bridges to haunt.</p>

<p>Some old threads should be kept as updates happen, keeping the topic in a single thread is usefull. But having said that I'm nutral on closeing older threads.</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>Just a test: to anyone who's responded so far, or to anyone just now reading this thread, could you please just "ping" the thread, just leave a word or two.</p>

<p>Anthony, while your suggestion is tempting, we'd lose too many members if we banned everyone who bumped a contentious thread just to gnaw on it some more. Heck, one of my favorite examples is a years-old thread on the Nikon forum regarding Soligor lenses. For whatever reason someone digs up that musty old bone once a year to gnaw on it again. Doesn't bother me since photo.net discussion threads don't automagically pop to the top unless a member chooses to use the "new responses" view.</p>

<p>Also, it's fairly common for enthusiastic but clueless n00bs to keep bumping threads anxiously, treating a discussion forum like a chat room, especially if they believe they have an urgent question. It's only moderately annoying on photo.net because it doesn't bump threads to the top. It would become really annoying if by default bumps always popped threads to the top.</p>

<p>Overall, the current system seems to keep the overall tone here fairly sane. But I can see the benefits to making it easier to find the active threads that interest you more easily.</p>

<p><em>(Also, non-gratuitous bump, per Mendel's request.)</em></p>

Mendel, what are you testing?

<p>Attention span I guess.</p>

<p>It certainly takes a few more brain cells and diligence to stay current with threads, here vs other sites. Also patience: for whatever reason, if you want to review your history it seems to involve a lot of heavy lifting for Photo.net, taking up to a minute just to show the user home page, and then another bout of crunching to get to the full history.</p>

<p>Maybe <em>just</em> speedier history access would be the best of both worlds?</p>