Reap what we sew.....

[jackhammer91406]

I know this will go under the heading of USER ERROR and I am prepared for that, but does anyone else have a hard time following threads that are lengthy? In the old MC software, I could readily find the new additions to a thread. I am no longer able to do that, or at least figure out what I am doing wrong. I am going to blame it on the chemo, but still, I would love to be able to get to the newest parts of a thread without having to click on "more replies" and then scrolling back up to find where the thread goes, only to find "more replies" .

Can someone nicely point me in the right direction?

[Steven_Draker]

Jackhhammer,

Have you tried to see the thread in "Linear Mode"? Look up in the upper right corner the "Display" menu just above your #1 post.

[cany10011]

In the Last Post Column, clicking the double white arrows in the blue icon next to the posters' name will allow you to "jump" to the most recent post.

 

It's not the most intuitive but is a very useful tool especially navigating through the labrynth of messages and submessages. Hope this helps (I found it a little cumbersome but finally figured it out recently)

 

 

 

Jackhhammer,

Have you tried to see the thread in "Linear Mode"? Look up in the upper right corner the "Display" menu just above your #1 post.[/color]

[seeker630]

I know this will go under the heading of USER ERROR and I am prepared for that, but does anyone else have a hard time following threads that are lengthy? In the old MC software, I could readily find the new additions to a thread. I am no longer able to do that, or at least figure out what I am doing wrong. I am going to blame it on the chemo, but still, I would love to be able to get to the newest parts of a thread without having to click on "more replies" and then scrolling back up to find where the thread goes, only to find "more replies" .

Can someone nicely point me in the right direction?[/color][/size][/font]

I too find it more difficult to follow longer threads - and I've seen several examples recently in which it was clear that someone was unaware of the relationship between posts (specifically, which particular post a response was in reference to). If you use the linear display view, then you lose the relationships and it can be confusing where 'Reply with quote' has not been used, since the order is strictly chronological. On the other hand, if you use the threaded or hybrid modes, you have to open the 'More replies' links, as you say.

I find my self using the linear view but occasionally switching back to threaded when it's not clear which post someone is replying to.

 

I'm wondering if 'Best practice' shbould be to always use 'Reply with quote'?

 

BTW - nice pun with 'Reap what we sew....'

[jimboivyo]

Whether it was an intentional pun or not, 'We reap what we sow' (Galatians 6:7-9)

[MsGuy]

I'm wondering if 'Best practice' should be to always use 'Reply with quote'?

 

Either that, seeker, or include the poster's name near the beginning of the reply. Or both.

 

And when responding to a specific point using 'Reply With Quote', I find it more readable if the quoted post is edited down to the relevant section.

[+ deej]

Threaded display is a little weak, that's for sure. But the screwy thing is that when we were auditioning replacement software this was the best of the lot.

 

We had other requirements (standards-based, multi-browser support, mobile support, admin tools, etc.) and there were other packages that met (most of) those, but none came as close to threaded display as this. It's a sorry statement about web-based discussion board software, but there it is.

 

Youngsters today don't understand or care about discussion threads. They're perfectly happy with in-stream comments on blogs or Facebook. <shrug>

[Guest DuchessIvanaKizznhugg]

...........I find it more readable if the quoted post is edited down to the relevant section.

 

Not that you're pointing any fingers!!

[MsGuy]

Not the point!!

 

I probably should add that one should exercise due diligence in editing a quote not to change the OP's meaning.

[Diverdan]

If I don't visit the Forum every day, I often just go to the last page of posts for a particular thread and then work "backwards" to the original post that started the thread. This helps me a lot and sometimes I just skim a page of comments, especially if the thread has taken a new direction and I am not very interested in the deviation. Maybe this approach can help you or not, but it sure helps me.

[seeker630]

If I don't visit the Forum every day, I often just go to the last page of posts for a particular thread and then work "backwards" to the original post that started the thread. This helps me a lot and sometimes I just skim a page of comments, especially if the thread has taken a new direction and I am not very interested in the deviation. Maybe this approach can help you or not, but it sure helps me.

I use the Linear view primarily, and the 'View first unread', tho sometimes, as i mentioned, I have to go to hybrid view to figure out what post a resposne is to. And occasionally the system thinkjs I've read posts I haven't.

[jackhammer91406]

Can someone nicely point me in the right direction?[/color][/size][/font]

 

I want to thank all of those who responded. All of the responses were helpful. It's one of the things I like about this board.

 

But the thing that helped the most was knowing it wasn't me or my chemo riddled brain. THAT made my day.