Water Canopy discussion

[Shawnster]

I merged the discussion we were having on the Water Canopy with the previous discussion.  http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/18249-the-water-canopy-a-question-with-no-real-answer-up-for-discussion/?p=325610

 

Nothing else to see here.  Move along, move along.

[Tortuga]

I merged the discussion we were having on the Water Canopy with the previous discussion.  http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/18249-the-water-canopy-a-question-with-no-real-answer-up-for-discussion/?p=325610

 

Nothing else to see here.  Move along, move along.

 

Just curious but do you merge threads based on the original posters topic or just on the direction the thread happens to take?

It seems the OP had a specific topic that he wanted to discuss and the topic veered into a slightly different direction, is that why you merged it with the previous discussion?

[carlos]

Just curious but do you merge threads based on the original posters topic or just on the direction the thread happens to take?

It seems the OP had a specific topic that he wanted to discuss and the topic veered into a slightly different direction, is that why you merged it with the previous discussion?

 

Richard, now ask him to unmerge it again. That's hard work.

[Tortuga]

Richard, now ask him to unmerge it again. That's hard work.

I wouldn't do that 

 

I was just curious about the decision making process.

[trottigy]

No, the thought process is - what can we do to keep the forum running as cleanly as possible?

 

When we see multiple threads (especially in different forums) about the same thing - we usually just merge in the thread in the forum that makes the most sense.

 

HOWEVER, there are exceptions - for example: we wont merge the September Video thread with the "How long till Armageddon" thread - even though they have become 2 threads talking about the same thing at the same time. As the monthly video thread is a monthly thread, BUT we might try and steer the comments about "this generation" in the September thread to the other one.

 

Some times we just lock one of the threads to keep the conversation all in one place.

 

Really, the thought process is just - what can we do to keep things "clean" (conversations about ONE topic in ONE thread). This has also lead us to split topics up ( so again there is just ONE topic in ONE thread).

[Tortuga]

No, the thought process is - what can we do to keep the forum running as cleanly as possible?

 

When we see multiple threads (especially in different forums) about the same thing - we usually just merge in the thread in the forum that makes the most sense.

 

I understand.

 

Do you usually go back to the OP to see if their question was answered before you merge their topic with one that might be going in a different direction?

[trottigy]

I understand.

 

Do you usually go back to the OP to see if their question was answered before you merge their topic with one that might be going in a different direction?

 

Sometimes - unless we do not see the OP participating.

 

EDIT: in this case - I think PalmHat made one post after his original one and it was not to bring the topic back to the original topic. It can be assumed that he was OK with the direction.  

Edited September 8, 2015 by trottigy

[Tortuga]

Sometimes - unless we do not see the OP participating.

I understand. Thanks.

[trottigy]

Richard, you do a great job at keeping the various threads on topic. If I haven't said anything before - THANKS!!!

 

We really do value the input of all the members. 

 

This is yet another good time to remind ones. We take seriously any and all reports of posts as well. The moderators do NOT have time to read every single post! We rely heavily on ALL members to click that report button if they see a topic or post go too far. Remember, if any post gets reported by 2 different people it IMMEDIATELY gets hidden.

 

Thank you ALL for your help