Improving the chat boards and avoiding the repetition of the same threads over and over again.


Website Feedback

1 to 50 of 64 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Generally speaking I love the Paizo chatboards; and I don't know if the firm has the technical support to handle this, but there are a couple of updates which I think would make the community a lot more useful:

1) Nested conversations within threads. Often side discussions take threads off-track but are still at least semi-relevant to the thread's topic. If replies were nested, it would make the community discussions much more direct and accessible;

2) It would be nice if up and down votes, similar to reddit, could be implemented on the thread level with the goal of avoid the 9 millionth thread on rogue's sucking, the caster-martial disparity, etc. Just not engaging doesn't help because the prevalence of these insanely repetitive threads which simply rehash the same arguments and assertion end up burying new topics of discussion. I am not sure if up/down voting is necessarily the solution to this, but I cannot think of a better one. I am interested to hear what the community at large has to say.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I tend to suspect that threads which pop up constantly and repeatedly are most likely about issues that pop up repeatedly and constantly. My question is why these issues never seen to be addressed. While it's true that nothing will please everyone, doing nothing doesn't please anyone that isn't already happy with the status quo.

Becoming more like Reddit isn't a goal I would support. :P

If a thread annoys you, there's an easy fix. To the right in the thread list there's a circle slash button that will hide the thread.

Nested threads sound like a bit of a pain to navigate, if there must be thread segregation, they could create an Issues subforum.


Well the nesting idea is mostly for sidetracking conversations within threads. I have no idea the best approach to avoiding the thread repetition problem; but I believe you're not necessarily correct about what the repetition of these threads indicate. It's not that they are necessarily problems; they are just problems for the small segment of the community that dislike certain things.

It would be better to unclog the general boards without forcing individual users to hide the repeated threads that appear. That's why the reddit model would be helpful; it would probably illustrate that not nearly as members of the PF community are concerned with these issues as there are very vocal individuals that want to continue to discuss these issues until they get change that only a minority of people really want.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ignoring and/or hiding threads about things you don't like is really easy. The forums are here for people to discuss the game, and everyone has the right to talk about how they feel about various parts of the game, even if you don't agree with how they feel.


Seranov wrote:
Ignoring and/or hiding threads about things you don't like is really easy. The forums are here for people to discuss the game, and everyone has the right to talk about how they feel about various parts of the game, even if you don't agree with how they feel.

I don't think you quite get my point. It's not that I care about one side or another; it's just certain issues have been hashed and rehashed so many times it knocks threads presenting more interesting or original question from the fore; despite the arguments being arguments being carbon copies of each other. Many iterations of which are posted by the same OP.

I'd just like a better streamlined system to make sure the topics most interesting to the general population rise to the top. Rather than threads where the same people generate 500 posts that I can search and of which I can find at least 10 clones.

Perhaps there's another way to measure this, for instance maybe Paizo could institute another default ordering based on number of unique individuals posting if the reddit idea doesn't seem popular. But I still think that would be better.

I also would love even more discrete subforums;that might solves many of my issues.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:

Well the nesting idea is mostly for sidetracking conversations within threads. I have no idea the best approach to avoiding the thread repetition problem; but I believe you're not necessarily correct about what the repetition of these threads indicate. It's not that they are necessarily problems; they are just problems for the small segment of the community that dislike certain things.

It would be better to unclog the general boards without forcing individual users to hide the repeated threads that appear. That's why the reddit model would be helpful; it would probably illustrate that not nearly as members of the PF community are concerned with these issues as there are very vocal individuals that want to continue to discuss these issues until they get change that only a minority of people really want.

If only a specific minority of posters were concerned about an issue, there would be limited threads about it. I was here for the flurry of blows problem. I was here for the Crane Wing nerf (and the revision). Recently, I saw the SLA revision. Each time, a concerned minority posted vigorously, in a few threads. Then things settled down.

By contrast, the issues in the threads you are complaining about come up on their own, not in reaction to a decision, but in reaction to inaction. Someone will come along, having noticed the same problem others have raised, post about it, and reinvigorate the others who had previously brought it up. The only realistic ways to prevent the threads are to block new users, censor all discussion of the topics, or address the issues.

It's also worth noting that vocal posting is shown to get results on other issues. Unchained (particularly Summoner, but also rogue and monk) is a good example. Vocal posting by a minority of players resulted in weakening one class, and attempts to improve two others. If every complaint were hidden away, it's unlikely this would have been possible.


Yes, but it may just be a minority of people who happen to be very upset about it. And the fact that it's often the same people vocal in these threads is indicative of that. It would just be nice if unique or interesting topics were not bumped by these repeated iterations which are not necessarily indicative of the community in general.

I'd rather people use flags and go back to the same thread or section on issues like martial v. caster disparity. So that it didn't have so very many iterations in the same week let alone over the last few years.

It would be cleaner in general. Non-repetitive. And allow people to find original topics in an expedited manner. Like I said, I am even find if there are multiple defaults if people prefer.

I just want a setup where the threads are not constantly dominated by certain arguments hashed until they can barely be seen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The same people are vocal on these boards period.

It's not likely there are much more than 50 or so people who post to these boards more often than twice a week for any extended period of time, the exception maybe being playtests.


Part of this is probably my fault. I'm REALLY lazy about hunting down threads re: the stuff I want to know. If I'm researching, say, a good Bodyguard build. I'll go into the messageboard search function, type "bodyguard builds," search through the first page of result threads and if I don't find what I want there, I just post the request in Advice. Were their hundreds more threads? Probably, but I'm too much of a slacker to go hunt them down.

Sorry folks. I don't mean to waste anyone's time. I'm probably just being selfish. Sorry.


Mark Hoover wrote:

Part of this is probably my fault. I'm REALLY lazy about hunting down threads re: the stuff I want to know. If I'm researching, say, a good Bodyguard build. I'll go into the messageboard search function, type "bodyguard builds," search through the first page of result threads and if I don't find what I want there, I just post the request in Advice. Were their hundreds more threads? Probably, but I'm too much of a slacker to go hunt them down.

Sorry folks. I don't mean to waste anyone's time. I'm probably just being selfish. Sorry.

I actually have less a problem with this than I do rehashing academic debate. Sure there are probably old threads on build advice, but the game is probably updating; if anything warrants a new thread it is this sort of advice.

But this is an even stronger argument to creating a ton of discrete sub-forums. There can be forums by class and archetype; so the advice thread would still show the most popular advice, but you can easily drill down and look for advice on bodyguard builds, but also post a new one without it being distracting.

Trust me, I've seen quite a few of your posts. It's definitely not the problem I have at least. I'd just rather find a separate place for the 32 Pathfinder 2.0 thread so they can be consolidate and not distract from newer, non-repetitive discussion.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

it's all DM_blake's fault, he just couldn't have one thread[/joke]

i love you DM_blake


kyrt-ryder wrote:
The same people are vocal on these boards period.

Pretty much this. You see the same faces a lot, fresh or re-hashed issue.

Scythia wrote:
I tend to suspect that threads which pop up constantly and repeatedly are most likely about issues that pop up repeatedly and constantly. My question is why these issues never seen to be addressed. While it's true that nothing will please everyone, doing nothing doesn't please anyone that isn't already happy with the status quo.

Yep, pretty much this. It isn't the same people starting the same topic repeatedly, it's new people bringing up an old topic and the people that complained about it before chiming in.

And I have to agree with the others here: If you don't like a thread, hide it. I do it all the time.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

i never allow myself to make a media bubble, i must see everything.


1) I find it's the same people bringing up certain issues again and again; 2) hiding it just doesn't help because the issues keep recurring and distracts others.

I am just not sure why no one would be in favor a more streamlined approach to the forums with better sorting, displays, and subforums. I think it would make for a better community rather than sifting through the same arguments made by the same people on a different thread every day.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:

Yes, but it may just be a minority of people who happen to be very upset about it. And the fact that it's often the same people vocal in these threads is indicative of that. It would just be nice if unique or interesting topics were not bumped by these repeated iterations which are not necessarily indicative of the community in general.

I'd rather people use flags and go back to the same thread or section on issues like martial v. caster disparity. So that it didn't have so very many iterations in the same week let alone over the last few years.

It would be cleaner in general. Non-repetitive. And allow people to find original topics in an expedited manner. Like I said, I am even find if there are multiple defaults if people prefer.

I just want a setup where the threads are not constantly dominated by certain arguments hashed until they can barely be seen.

A quick and lazy search showed threads about one of these issues add far back as 2010. Alot (maybe even most) of the vocal posters you're seeing now probably didn't even post here then. It's not always the same people in these threads, you're just seeing that with a limited timeframe. It is the same issue under discussion, which makes it all the more baffling why it goes unaddressed.


It doesn't get addressed because it doesn't have to get addressed.

Caster Edition sells.

Granted, Martials are good too, through all levels would probably achieve record sales, but why bother when what you're already doing works well enough?


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:

1) I find it's the same people bringing up certain issues again and again; 2) hiding it just doesn't help because the issues keep recurring and distracts others.

I am just not sure why no one would be in favor a more streamlined approach to the forums with better sorting, displays, and subforums. I think it would make for a better community rather than sifting through the same arguments made by the same people on a different thread every day.

1) Really? The same person started the exact same thread? Not in my experience. Now there are people that have pet peeves about some aspects of the game and bring it up when possible, but they don't create new threads to do so. In these cases, nesting is more of a hindrance than a help.

2)Hiding it works just fine, at least for me and it seems others that have suggested it. As to "I am just not sure why no one would be in favor a more streamlined approach", maybe it's that they don't think it's needed or will help the underlining issues that create the issues you dislike. Neither of your suggestion in your OP seem like they'd make the forum better for me or stop repeated threads on the same topic that is left unresolved.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

It doesn't get addressed because it doesn't have to get addressed.

Caster Edition sells.

Granted, Martials are good too, through all levels would probably achieve record sales, but why bother when what you're already doing works well enough?

I don't want this thread to turn into another martial-caster debate. That's not my point at all. However, just because there are several threads on a topic doesn't mean many people or even a significant percentage of people want a change. Also it is unlikely people who love that status quo will post threads on that. "Keep everything that same!" would be a particular silly thread. So threads are bias towards negativity. It's no proof these things are actual problems; nor is the point of the forum to drive issues to the fore so much they get changed.

All I am looking for is an improvement to the forum system to avoid having to sort through repeated iterations of the same threads, which may draw the focus of other forum participants from other more novel topics. I by and large love the community, but I'd like a system where I can drill down to the topics I am interested in and see the topics the community deems most popular; not the topics that are most frequently posted by people disgruntled by the exact same issue time and time again.


It wasn't my intention to make a debate out of it either, just pointing out that what they're doing is profitable so they're unlikely to change just because they could do better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:

Generally speaking I love the Paizo chatboards; and I don't know if the firm has the technical support to handle this, but there are a couple of updates which I think would make the community a lot more useful:

1) Nested conversations within threads. Often side discussions take threads off-track but are still at least semi-relevant to the thread's topic. If replies were nested, it would make the community discussions much more direct and accessible;

2) It would be nice if up and down votes, similar to reddit, could be implemented on the thread level with the goal of avoid the 9 millionth thread on rogue's sucking, the caster-martial disparity, etc. Just not engaging doesn't help because the prevalence of these insanely repetitive threads which simply rehash the same arguments and assertion end up burying new topics of discussion. I am not sure if up/down voting is necessarily the solution to this, but I cannot think of a better one. I am interested to hear what the community at large has to say.

Quick heads up, this probably fits better in Website Feedback rather than here (this is General Discussion for the RPG itself, not the board as a whole).

Also, I like neither of these. Reddit is a pain to browse, IMO.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

You know, I could swear I've seen threads like this before...


graystone wrote:


2)Hiding it works just fine, at least for me and it seems others that have suggested it. As to "I am just not sure why no one would be in favor a more streamlined approach", maybe it's that they don't think it's needed or will help the underlining issues that create the issues you dislike. Neither of your suggestion in your OP seem like they'd make the forum better for me or stop repeated threads on the same topic that is left unresolved.

Hiding doesn't work when you're interested in one part of the discussion on a thread, but 90% of the new posts are a derail on one of the old reliable topics.

Sure, you can ignore the thread, but then you lose the 10% of posts that are on the original topic.


thejeff wrote:
graystone wrote:


2)Hiding it works just fine, at least for me and it seems others that have suggested it. As to "I am just not sure why no one would be in favor a more streamlined approach", maybe it's that they don't think it's needed or will help the underlining issues that create the issues you dislike. Neither of your suggestion in your OP seem like they'd make the forum better for me or stop repeated threads on the same topic that is left unresolved.

Hiding doesn't work when you're interested in one part of the discussion on a thread, but 90% of the new posts are a derail on one of the old reliable topics.

Sure, you can ignore the thread, but then you lose the 10% of posts that are on the original topic.

So how does nesting fix this? How do you section off derail that isn't a direct reply? Or has on topic parts?

Sorry, nothing suggested is going to help your issue. You'd STILL have to sort through it all to find the 10%, it's just be harder to do so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

It doesn't get addressed because it doesn't have to get addressed.

Caster Edition sells.

Granted, Martials are good too, through all levels would probably achieve record sales, but why bother when what you're already doing works well enough?

I don't want this thread to turn into another martial-caster debate. That's not my point at all. However, just because there are several threads on a topic doesn't mean many people or even a significant percentage of people want a change. Also it is unlikely people who love that status quo will post threads on that. "Keep everything that same!" would be a particular silly thread. So threads are bias towards negativity. It's no proof these things are actual problems; nor is the point of the forum to drive issues to the fore so much they get changed.

All I am looking for is an improvement to the forum system to avoid having to sort through repeated iterations of the same threads, which may draw the focus of other forum participants from other more novel topics. I by and large love the community, but I'd like a system where I can drill down to the topics I am interested in and see the topics the community deems most popular; not the topics that are most frequently posted by people disgruntled by the exact same issue time and time again.

That's why I've been careful to avoid pointing out the specific issue that you don't want to see threads about.

To be blunt (though not meant with any anger or ill will), I don't think rearranging or redesigning the entire message board is better than asking you to click a single button to hide a thread. A hidden thread no longer "clogs" the list of discussions. You repeatedly point out that these threads are by a minority of posters, yet overlook one detail: an individual is the smallest minority. You're the only one asking for this change.


When I come to this website with a question, my first instinct is to do a search for relevant topics.

Initially, when I have had a question, and my search did not turn up a definitive answer, I would often select the thread that was most relevant to my question and ask my question there. But when I did that, I was flamed for "necroing the thread." So it seems to me that the community has voted to have multiple threads on the same topic, and if we don't like it, we do deserve it.

I find the FAQs are Browsable, but not Searchable, and if I could easily search the FAQ section of the Paizo Website, I suspect that there would be a whole lot of questions that I would just not have to ask and a whole lot of arguments would just end. Likewise Official Rules Posts are harder to find in the ocean of threads and comments. If something can be done to organize Official Rules Posts within the Forum so that it's easier to find them, that would be much appreciated.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
I find the FAQs are Browsable, but not Searchable

The easiest way to check the FAQ's is ctrl F in the appropriate book FAQ. Not the easiest, but it works for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Scott Wilhelm wrote:

When I come to this website with a question, my first instinct is to do a search for relevant topics.

Initially, when I have had a question, and my search did not turn up a definitive answer, I would often select the thread that was most relevant to my question and ask my question there. But when I did that, I was flamed for "necroing the thread." So it seems to me that the community has voted to have multiple threads on the same topic, and if we don't like it, we do deserve it.

I find the FAQs are Browsable, but not Searchable, and if I could easily search the FAQ section of the Paizo Website, I suspect that there would be a whole lot of questions that I would just not have to ask and a whole lot of arguments would just end. Likewise Official Rules Posts are harder to find in the ocean of threads and comments. If something can be done to organize Official Rules Posts within the Forum so that it's easier to find them, that would be much appreciated.

to be clear i always comment on necromancy, but not to dissuade it just because TONS of people do not realize how old the thread is and reply to people who will never reply back to them.


graystone wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
I find the FAQs are Browsable, but not Searchable
The easiest way to check the FAQ's is ctrl F in the appropriate book FAQ. Not the easiest, but it works for me.

Only problem I have there is that I don't necessarily remember which book it was FAQed under, especially when there is a how does this stack with that and they're from two different books but reference a rule in a third. I wish they had a general rules FAQ page with notations as to which book(s) it applied to.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Wilhelm wrote:

When I come to this website with a question, my first instinct is to do a search for relevant topics.

Initially, when I have had a question, and my search did not turn up a definitive answer, I would often select the thread that was most relevant to my question and ask my question there. But when I did that, I was flamed for "necroing the thread." So it seems to me that the community has voted to have multiple threads on the same topic, and if we don't like it, we do deserve it.

I find the FAQs are Browsable, but not Searchable, and if I could easily search the FAQ section of the Paizo Website, I suspect that there would be a whole lot of questions that I would just not have to ask and a whole lot of arguments would just end. Likewise Official Rules Posts are harder to find in the ocean of threads and comments. If something can be done to organize Official Rules Posts within the Forum so that it's easier to find them, that would be much appreciated.

Some people will flame you for a necro. Other will flame you for not doing a search. You really can't win, so I say do what you want.

The only necros that annoy me is when someone responds directly to a poster as if they posted yesterday. However using that thread to talk about the topic is ok for me. I still wouldn't flame you for a direct comment, but I would ask why you did it.


Manwolf wrote:
graystone wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
I find the FAQs are Browsable, but not Searchable
The easiest way to check the FAQ's is ctrl F in the appropriate book FAQ. Not the easiest, but it works for me.
Only problem I have there is that I don't necessarily remember which book it was FAQed under, especially when there is a how does this stack with that and they're from two different books but reference a rule in a third. I wish they had a general rules FAQ page with notations as to which book(s) it applied to.

Yep, there's no doubt that looking through the FAQ's could be much improved. A combined FAQ list or a way to make a search JUST search the FAQ.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:

1) I find it's the same people bringing up certain issues again and again; 2) hiding it just doesn't help because the issues keep recurring and distracts others.

I am just not sure why no one would be in favor a more streamlined approach to the forums with better sorting, displays, and subforums. I think it would make for a better community rather than sifting through the same arguments made by the same people on a different thread every day.

I don't really see why hiding those threads doesn't solve your problem? Granted, you have to click a little circle a few times a day, but is that having a huge impact? You won't see the threads that offend you, so the forum won't be clogged up for you. Meanwhile, those who like rehashing debates can continue to do so.

"Other people might get distracted" seems a little paternalistic, to me - with the hide function we can choose for ourselves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Isnt the general idea the op is suggestion to introduce nested messages so that different conversations may flourish without tkakign voer a thread?

I.E:
Poster 1: "How could I make this fighter build work."
Poster 2: "By not playing fighter!"
-(Nested conversation starts where people argue about the viability of fighters)
Poster 3: "You could do Y and take X to make it work"
Poster 1: "K-thx."

In the example above the original poster can hope to get a reply without having to work through however many arguments about fighters the thread started.


Nested posting is amongst my favorite ideas; I just thought it would clean up threads a lot easier. Side conversations would not detract from the overall thread.

I still prefer the idea of a more reddit like voting system with an alternative front pages so that the same cadre of individuals with the same problems don't post the same repetitive debates over an over again.

My personally deleting threads doesn't help (and also should be on my so that others can have the same Sisyphean argument repeatedly. Because as long as the front page is driven by the most recent posts, interesting posts end up near the bottom of the page and end up dying, while we get the 90th thread Pathfinder 2.0 where half the people say, "No 2.0" and others say "we need radical change immediately."

I think a reddit like system or system where the threads with the most unique posters have made posts come to the top would be preferable and should be the default display. But even if it's not it should be an option.

I also don't understand the opposition to more specific sub-sections which focus on different class types, certain philosophical debates on the structure of PF, etc. So that instead of have to delete threads and hope to find what I want in the search (which is definitely a real rough approximation) I can just go the specific sub-topics I am interested in and allow me to see a history of posts on this topic to avoid rehashing an argument for the 100th time.

One more thing that everyone seems to be ignoring: just because these threads show up a lot does not mean most people consider them a problem; just that there's a vocal minority that likes to argue about it a lot. In any event number of threads is a bad way to judge if an issue matters to a community; a reddit-like system would be far more indicative of that.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:


One more thing that everyone seems to be ignoring: just because these threads show up a lot does not mean most people consider them a problem; just that there's a vocal minority that likes to argue about it a lot.

Let me turn that around.

One more think that everyone seems to be ignoring: just because these threads show up a lot does not mean that there's a vocal minority that likes to argue about it a lot, just that's most people consider them a problem.

If you want me to take the first version any more seriously than the second -- because right now, I consider the first version laughably out-of-touch -- I'll need more than a grumpy old man telling me to get off someone else's lawn.

Or to put it another way, I ignore it for the same reason I ignore being told that the Royal Family of England are Space Lizards. And for roughly the same reason. I have no reason to believe it's true and every reason to believe that anyone who thinks it's true is simply wrong.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Flagged to have the thread moved to Website Feedback with all the other threads of this nature.


Scribbling Rambler wrote:
Flagged to have the thread moved to Website Feedback with all the other threads of this nature.

I think this is wrong, because it's specific to PF discussions in general not just website functioning. It's about how the website can best function to facilitate the best discussions of the game. I would ask you to unflag.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:


One more thing that everyone seems to be ignoring: just because these threads show up a lot does not mean most people consider them a problem; just that there's a vocal minority that likes to argue about it a lot.

Let me turn that around.

One more think that everyone seems to be ignoring: just because these threads show up a lot does not mean that there's a vocal minority that likes to argue about it a lot, just that's most people consider them a problem.

If you want me to take the first version any more seriously than the second -- because right now, I consider the first version laughably out-of-touch -- I'll need more than a grumpy old man telling me to get off someone else's lawn.

Or to put it another way, I ignore it for the same reason I ignore being told that the Royal Family of England are Space Lizards. And for roughly the same reason. I have no reason to believe it's true and every reason to believe that anyone who thinks it's true is simply wrong.

We're just asserting our observations against each other, which is why a) I prefer a filtering system based on hard data, not the most frequently replied to threads; b) I think we can all agree we definitely don't need 40 threads on the same exact issue; it detracts from the community.


tsuruki wrote:

Isnt the general idea the op is suggestion to introduce nested messages so that different conversations may flourish without tkakign voer a thread?

I.E:
Poster 1: "How could I make this fighter build work."
Poster 2: "By not playing fighter!"
-(Nested conversation starts where people argue about the viability of fighters)
Poster 3: "You could do Y and take X to make it work"
Poster 1: "K-thx."

In the example above the original poster can hope to get a reply without having to work through however many arguments about fighters the thread started.

Do you SERIOUSLY thing people taking care of this site are going to read through every thread and then set aside off-topic talk in a nesting? Next, where do you put threads that have both on point and off topic points? Really, nesting solves nothing and would make more work for the people running things. A lose/lose situation.

Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
I think a reddit like system or system where the threads with the most unique posters have made posts come to the top would be preferable and should be the default display. But even if it's not it should be an option.

Why on earth would I want a topic a week old to take precedence over one started today just based on posters? That means the kind of posts you want to see auto get moved to the bottom at start because only a few people post at start. It's counter-intuitive and IMO much worse than how it is now.

specific sub-sections: Only works if used and in most cases doesn't matter in the least. I check the site by clicking the RPG heading, so if you add 50 new sub-topics under it they all show up for me. Lots of work for no benefit.

vocal minority: Just once, go look at the threads you hate and look at who started them. Now tell me if it's the "vocal minority". My guess it's not and that right there is why you'll see it come up repeatedly. New people to the site that have the exact same issue come on and ask about it. Unless the problem is solved a simple click is the simple and easy solution of getting it of your screen.

don't need 40 threads on the same exact issue: Maybe but what we could use is more of these kind of questions answered/fixed. You'd have had a LOT less 'rogues sucks' threads if they'd have made the unchained rogue a few years ago. Ignoring the issue didn't get it fixed but repeatedly complaining about it in "40 threads on the same exact issue" seemed to. Hiding it and pretending it only effects a "vocal minority" sure didn't.


graystone wrote:
tsuruki wrote:

Isnt the general idea the op is suggestion to introduce nested messages so that different conversations may flourish without tkakign voer a thread?

I.E:
Poster 1: "How could I make this fighter build work."
Poster 2: "By not playing fighter!"
-(Nested conversation starts where people argue about the viability of fighters)
Poster 3: "You could do Y and take X to make it work"
Poster 1: "K-thx."

In the example above the original poster can hope to get a reply without having to work through however many arguments about fighters the thread started.

Do you SERIOUSLY thing people taking care of this site are going to read through every thread and then set aside off-topic talk in a nesting? Next, where do you put threads that have both on point and off topic points? Really, nesting solves nothing and would make more work for the people running things. A lose/lose situation.

No. No work for people running things. Different posting software that automatically nests replies under the post they're replying too. Like half the discussion sites on the web.

Obviously some work (quite a lot probably) to switch to such a system, but nothing to keep the nesting going once you're on the system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No thank you. Right now I can reply to three or so posts at once I don't want my posts to be nested inside the original one. I like just reading down a line not having to click on a post just to see the responses.


thejeff wrote:
graystone wrote:
tsuruki wrote:

Isnt the general idea the op is suggestion to introduce nested messages so that different conversations may flourish without tkakign voer a thread?

I.E:
Poster 1: "How could I make this fighter build work."
Poster 2: "By not playing fighter!"
-(Nested conversation starts where people argue about the viability of fighters)
Poster 3: "You could do Y and take X to make it work"
Poster 1: "K-thx."

In the example above the original poster can hope to get a reply without having to work through however many arguments about fighters the thread started.

Do you SERIOUSLY thing people taking care of this site are going to read through every thread and then set aside off-topic talk in a nesting? Next, where do you put threads that have both on point and off topic points? Really, nesting solves nothing and would make more work for the people running things. A lose/lose situation.

No. No work for people running things. Different posting software that automatically nests replies under the post they're replying too. Like half the discussion sites on the web.

Obviously some work (quite a lot probably) to switch to such a system, but nothing to keep the nesting going once you're on the system.

That only works if you reply to a single person and not the OP/thread. How does all that nesting work help OP replies? Nesting only works if the whole community works to keep off topic debates IN the nests. Do you really expect that to be the case? If they ever instituted it here, I'd be tempted to reply to the OP with off topic talk JUST to annoy those that got nested added. :P


graystone wrote:
thejeff wrote:
graystone wrote:
tsuruki wrote:

Isnt the general idea the op is suggestion to introduce nested messages so that different conversations may flourish without tkakign voer a thread?

I.E:
Poster 1: "How could I make this fighter build work."
Poster 2: "By not playing fighter!"
-(Nested conversation starts where people argue about the viability of fighters)
Poster 3: "You could do Y and take X to make it work"
Poster 1: "K-thx."

In the example above the original poster can hope to get a reply without having to work through however many arguments about fighters the thread started.

Do you SERIOUSLY thing people taking care of this site are going to read through every thread and then set aside off-topic talk in a nesting? Next, where do you put threads that have both on point and off topic points? Really, nesting solves nothing and would make more work for the people running things. A lose/lose situation.

No. No work for people running things. Different posting software that automatically nests replies under the post they're replying too. Like half the discussion sites on the web.

Obviously some work (quite a lot probably) to switch to such a system, but nothing to keep the nesting going once you're on the system.

That only works if you reply to a single person and not the OP/thread. How does all that nesting work help OP replies? Nesting only works if the whole community works to keep off topic debates IN the nests. Do you really expect that to be the case? If they ever instituted it here, I'd be tempted to reply to the OP with off topic talk JUST to annoy those that got nested added. :P

It won't be perfect of course, but generally the off topic posts reply to other posts as they start driving off topic.

When you're infuriated by someone's idiotic opinion nesting actually encourages you to reply directly and stay nested, rather than drop a unrelated and apparently completely disassociated post at the top level.


thejeff: Not in the least thejeff. I often reply like this, especially when I have multiple points and/or people to reply to. Nesting is worthless here.

But lets assume you are correct for a moment. What happens if/when the topic gets back on track inside said nests? How do you understand the context of quotes from said nests. When you avoid the nest, you'll have no idea where "It won't be perfect of course" come from.

Once again, I fail to see the value/benefit of nesting in comparison to the effort it's take to make it happen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am fine with the present situation...honestly I hate nested replies because its a lot of extra clicking I don't want to do.

As for people posting over and over the same topic...shrugs. Obviously there is interest. Personally I don't care much for many of the rules forum threads, so I just ignore the forum for the most part.


graystone wrote:

thejeff: Not in the least thejeff. I often reply like this, especially when I have multiple points and/or people to reply to. Nesting is worthless here.

But lets assume you are correct for a moment. What happens if/when the topic gets back on track inside said nests? How do you understand the context of quotes from said nests. When you avoid the nest, you'll have no idea where "It won't be perfect of course" come from.

Once again, I fail to see the value/benefit of nesting in comparison to the effort it's take to make it happen.

But in a nested system, your post would be down at the bottom of the page, completely devoid of any context or clue which of my posts you were responding to. Which is the motivation to keep replying and staying in the nested tree.

If the topic gets back on track, it's not going to magically reappear at the top level without context. You'll only realize it's back on topic if you dig through the nested posts to find it.
Have you ever used a site with a nested system? It doesn't seem like you have a very good idea what they're like.

Grand Lodge

Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Scribbling Rambler wrote:
Flagged to have the thread moved to Website Feedback with all the other threads of this nature.
I think this is wrong, because it's specific to PF discussions in general not just website functioning. It's about how the website can best function to facilitate the best discussions of the game. I would ask you to unflag.

1/ Unflagging is not possible.

2/ This is not a discussion about the Pathfinder RPG. Therefore it does not belong in RPG Discussion.
3/ It is more likely to get the attention of the Website Team if it is in the proper section.

I apologize if my tone seems hostile, it is not intended that way. Nor is my flagging the thread any sort of judgement against the discussion or the OP. The only reason I mentioned it was so you would be able to easily find it if the moderators agree with me.

All that said, I personally prefer the way the boards are currently set up. Even though the status quo does allow for a lot of redundant threads, some times that is preferable to thread necromancy. Especially in rules discussion, where the game is continually evolving and discussions based on 2009 (when we only had the CRB) may no longer have any relevance.


thejeff wrote:
graystone wrote:

thejeff: Not in the least thejeff. I often reply like this, especially when I have multiple points and/or people to reply to. Nesting is worthless here.

But lets assume you are correct for a moment. What happens if/when the topic gets back on track inside said nests? How do you understand the context of quotes from said nests. When you avoid the nest, you'll have no idea where "It won't be perfect of course" come from.

Once again, I fail to see the value/benefit of nesting in comparison to the effort it's take to make it happen.

But in a nested system, your post would be down at the bottom of the page, completely devoid of any context or clue which of my posts you were responding to. Which is the motivation to keep replying and staying in the nested tree.

If the topic gets back on track, it's not going to magically reappear at the top level without context. You'll only realize it's back on topic if you dig through the nested posts to find it.
Have you ever used a site with a nested system? It doesn't seem like you have a very good idea what they're like.

The nesting you are talking about seems different than the nesting I'm talking about. If I post after you and my post isn't right after yours, then that's pretty messed up for a forum and I want it even less than how I was thinking you meant.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

It doesn't get addressed because it doesn't have to get addressed.

Caster Edition sells.

Granted, Martials are good too, through all levels would probably achieve record sales, but why bother when what you're already doing works well enough?

I don't want this thread to turn into another martial-caster debate. That's not my point at all. However, just because there are several threads on a topic doesn't mean many people or even a significant percentage of people want a change. Also it is unlikely people who love that status quo will post threads on that. "Keep everything that same!" would be a particular silly thread. So threads are bias towards negativity. It's no proof these things are actual problems; nor is the point of the forum to drive issues to the fore so much they get changed.

All I am looking for is an improvement to the forum system to avoid having to sort through repeated iterations of the same threads, which may draw the focus of other forum participants from other more novel topics. I by and large love the community, but I'd like a system where I can drill down to the topics I am interested in and see the topics the community deems most popular; not the topics that are most frequently posted by people disgruntled by the exact same issue time and time again.

What you're asking for is not practical. Threads will cone into being on a topic, have their day or week, and then die. And then week, or months, later, someone else will bring up the topic. There is no system, that can constrain human will. Fortunately thre is the utility of the "hide" switch.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

The same people are vocal on these boards period.

It's not likely there are much more than 50 or so people who post to these boards more often than twice a week for any extended period of time, the exception maybe being playtests.

This. There are on many threads the same people arguing the other same people and haven't agreed yet. I used to keep a chart of who was mad at who on a given day but it got too cumbersome to keep up with. Still, I can usually pick out who is going to say what about a thread based on their past posts and am usually right when I bet with myself that X poster will show up on a thread about Y because Z is there saying something "wrong".

It's a fun game to play!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:

Generally speaking I love the Paizo chatboards; and I don't know if the firm has the technical support to handle this, but there are a couple of updates which I think would make the community a lot more useful:

1) Nested conversations within threads. Often side discussions take threads off-track but are still at least semi-relevant to the thread's topic. If replies were nested, it would make the community discussions much more direct and accessible;

I have used such. They were no better and no worse than this style. I have also used BBSes, and internet lists. Again no better and no worse. Each style lends itself to replies in a certain form.

To whoever stated nested lists were over half the discussion lists on the net, I reply, not so in the ones I see,

----

You later say you keep seeing the same names come up all the time. So do I. It is a function of your interests, not of their being vocal. If everyone on this thread were to name the top five names they see, I bet you would see at least 30-40 names mentioned, not 7-10.

To the idea of dedicated class threads and the like, I say that I have never played a barbarian, but because of the occasional barbarian thread, I now know how they play, and what to expect of them. If they were split off, I would not have this knowledge. Likewise, I would not see how a barbarian can synergize with another non-barbarian build. To separate at this level would lessen the value of the forum to me.

----

Someone mentioned about searching and necroing threads. I think it is fine to necro a thread provided 1) you acknowledge it, 2) you contribute something the to topic of the thread. For example, how a new FAQ changes the thing the thread is about, or how a magic item or new class can do something better/easier that the thread laments cannot be done.

----

To the idea of promoting threads based on number of unique posters, that means every new thread goes on the bottom of the pile, since they have the lowest number of unique posters. To make it work, you need to counterweight by age of post. What is the best balance between age and popularity? I don't know.

/cevah

1 to 50 of 64 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Website Feedback / Improving the chat boards and avoiding the repetition of the same threads over and over again. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.