I know this suggestion will likely meet opposition, but considering the top 5 topics are recycled every week, month, or year, I would like to suggest thread consolidation.
When a thread is started questioning the Trinity, for example, it is immediately consolidated by a moderator with one of the hundreds of threads on the same topic. I feel like we are reinventing the wheel every week by a new comer (or even seasoned member) who wants to start a thread on whatever is on his mind that minute. "The Trinity doesn't make sense to me, I'm going to start a new thread asking Christians about it." (except this has been done hundreds of times)
An alternative suggestion would be to make stickies on the top 5 topics along with a rule to post first to those threads and if your OP is different from those, go ahead and make a new thread. It would, in a sense, force people to respond to hundreds of posts of debate rather than simply make a new thread.
my $0.02
Forum Suggestion
Moderator: Moderators
Post #2
New threads on a regular basis keeps forum activty clean and consistent. I can't imagine the mess that would ensue from having a discussion topic like the Trinity confined to a single thread.
My €0.02.
My €0.02.
Post #4
Any other forum that visitors come and post a new thread for their individual desires would be met with a simple reply "use the search function." If I go on a forum to find how to change the oil on my car and post a thread "How do I change my oil?", the members of that forum would sigh and (1) ask me politely to use the search function or (2) simply delete my thread. I don't see how this is any different.AkiThePirate wrote: New threads on a regular basis keeps forum activty clean and consistent. I can't imagine the mess that would ensue from having a discussion topic like the Trinity confined to a single thread.
How long does it take to thoughtfully respond to objections? I'm slower than others so it may take me 1/2 hour to a day or two to think through someone's argument and respond the best I can. Where does this time go if another person starts a thread with the exact same question a week later? I feel my time is in vain. Do I continue with the first thread or move on to the newer one and spend countless hours that I know will be buried in the 130+ pages and 6500+ threads?
A simple sticky that directs people:
"On the Trinity"
"On Subjective v. Objective Morals"
"On Subjective v. Objective Truth"
A new comer (Christian or atheist) who wants to debate the Trinity reads through (or doesn't) the sticky and makes his argument there.
Post #5
Perhaps I was being a little generous.[color=red]cholland[/color] wrote:haha...that'd be $0.02 = €0.01.
I get your point; there are many forums I frequent where this is the case.[color=blue]cholland[/color] wrote:Any other forum that visitors come and post a new thread for their individual desires would be met with a simple reply "use the search function." If I go on a forum to find how to change the oil on my car and post a thread "How do I change my oil?", the members of that forum would sigh and (1) ask me politely to use the search function or (2) simply delete my thread. I don't see how this is any different.
The reason it is different, however, is that changing ones oil is not much of an issue of debate; there's the right way, the wrong way, and the Max Power way. If there were a great many paradigms on changing oil, which type of oil to use, the philosophical implications of using oil to begin with, etc. such forums would likely operate differently.
It could also be viewed as this being a debating forum, as opposed to an information forum. If it was simply possible that people would google "Does God exist?", come to this forum, search for threads of fitting titles with [SOLVED] next to them and read that, then people probably wouldn't have to be asking in the first place. (Proof by contradiction!
)Another way to view it is that debate is, generally, a hobby; something done out of will to do so. Limiting people in this regard seems a little improper considering that.
If the same thread pops up, it's probably productive to procure your earlier points on the subject, and quoting or referencing those, debate the topic. I admit it's a bit of a pain(Evolution threads?), but that's the price we pay for a debating forum.[color=green]cholland[/color] wrote:How long does it take to thoughtfully respond to objections? I'm slower than others so it may take me 1/2 hour to a day or two to think through someone's argument and respond the best I can. Where does this time go if another person starts a thread with the exact same question a week later? I feel my time is in vain. Do I continue with the first thread or move on to the newer one and spend countless hours that I know will be buried in the 130+ pages and 6500+ threads?
Don't feel the need to reply to every single thread on the same subject, or you'll get worn out with it, as many have done.
As far as very active topics go, they show up in most topic feeds on the forum. We can't force people to look at them, and making that a rule seems a bit crazy.
Perhaps the solution would be to simply request people to look for an active topic on the same subject before making one? Checking the posts from the last 24 hours would suffice.
-
Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9200
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Post #6
I think it isn't practical to have people go back to old threads all the time and specifically to a site like this I think Christianity needs to be explained and repeated to each person as they approach the question of obeying God and seeking salvation in Christ.
Post #7
That would be a start. I feel the root of the problem is folks want their voices heard (i.e. they want attention). Why should I reply to a 178 page thread where nobody will see my post when I can make a new one with the same OP? The more controversial and taboo, the more attention I will get. Except the debate they are proposing is in that 178 page thread. Read it, study it, see the arguments have been done. If nothing else needs to be added to the discussion, move on. If there is a rock not uncovered, feel free to respond. If the topic itself is nowhere to be found (unlikely), post a new thread.AkiThePirate wrote:Perhaps the solution would be to simply request people to look for an active topic on the same subject before making one? Checking the posts from the last 24 hours would suffice.
I guess Wootah is right though. How would I feel if I had a debate question, however illegitimate, and someone smuggingly pointed me to so many threads that have been done before (as I did)? I apologize and retract my suggestion.
