General question : Is there a cost to opening new threads?

[jeanpierre]

Much prefer the continuity and aggregate of a discussion along a thread versus jumping back and forth through the chaos of a hundred threads...

Plus fewer duplicate shares when there are fewer threads; conversely it's easier to go back on a single thread to find an information share to reference versus a dozen threads...

On more elite boards like Sons of Sam Horn (Boston Red Sox), not everyone can start a thread; fortunately, as Smash pointed out, we've fewer restrictions, so you do you...

[Rugby Saint II]

Originally Posted by jeanpierre

Much prefer the continuity and aggregate of a discussion along a thread versus jumping back and forth through the chaos of a hundred threads...

Plus fewer duplicate shares when there are fewer threads; conversely it's easier to go back on a single thread to find an information share to reference versus a dozen threads...

On more elite boards like Sons of Sam Horn (Boston Red Sox), not everyone can start a thread; fortunately, as Smash pointed out, we've fewer restrictions, so you do you...

That is true right up until the thread gets thread jacked to call out another poster and it devolves into hate speech. I don't see this as much since I blocked saintfan though. Is he still at, it or can I unblock him now to read the info he brings again?

I have tried to start a few threads but two or three responses is just embarrassing. Lol There are thread masters here on the bng that I highly respect.

[TheOak]

Originally Posted by jeanpierre

Much prefer the continuity and aggregate of a discussion along a thread versus jumping back and forth through the chaos of a hundred threads...

Plus fewer duplicate shares when there are fewer threads; conversely it's easier to go back on a single thread to find an information share to reference versus a dozen threads...

On more elite boards like Sons of Sam Horn (Boston Red Sox), not everyone can start a thread; fortunately, as Smash pointed out, we've fewer restrictions, so you do you...

I’m not disagreeing with you JP, more just nuance. What I have learned after having owned and run a few boards is that users have different interpretations of what the thread topic is. If a thread about Watson turns into a discussion about Winston it’s veered off topic. If the thread were titled ‘QBs we are considering’ then they aren’t off topic. Sometimes a subject line change is warranted over a thread merge or split.

One unwritten rule about forums is that activity generally breeds activity. If I look at a board for the first time and I only see three threads replied to in the last 24-48 hours then it’s a dead board to me. If I see 15 discussions (not articles posted, different animal) started by the same user in the last 24 hours and it just so happens to be the Admin/Owner that’s false activity.

One thread 27 pages long is generally treated like one post 27 paragraphs long… tl;dr and skip to the last page. If a thread is 2 days old with 10 pages I’m more likely to read through than a thread 6 weeks old with 10 pages.

If we want a quality board then there are no hard rules but rather users that practice a little discretion and run a short search before posting to help decide if there is already a discussion they can build upon or if the topic is unique enough to start a new thread.

For what it’s worth, one liners statements like “Goodel sucks” might get a bunch of likes but generate little qualitive discussion, a one liner questions like “what do you think the future of the NFL should look like?” Should generate plenty of discussions and opinions. These are discussion boards after all.

Realize it or not but, just by asking the question that you did you’ve started a thread with a lot better quality discussion that many threads on this page.