Keeping everything related in one thread is a terrible idea

[BobElHat]

Why the insistence on keeping all vaguely related discussion to a single thread?

Lots of useful information on GTPlanet is buried deep within enormously long threads - often hundreds of pages long. This is a direct result of strictly enforced policy.

The idea presumably is that things will be easier to find and discussion related to a particular topic will be kept together. But it doesn't make things easier to find, it actually makes it much, much, much, much harder to extract relevant information. That leads to repeat questions, which is just a waste of everybody's time.

There are two ways to use the forum search:

1) Show threads. This means you find that your answer is somewhere amongst the hundreds of posts in a particular thread. It might take a few hours to read every post in these monster threads. Nobody is going to spend three hours wading through all 100 pages of chit-chat to find an answer on page 50 (which turns out to be wrong and is corrected on page 73).

2) Show posts. This will direct you to the right post, but if you do that it doesn't matter which thread the post is in - as long as its in the right forum a search will find it. This is the only way search is of any real use and is renders the everything-in-one-thread idea futile.

It just makes no sense to me to have these huge threads. Why not have a thread for each person's cockpit setup, wheel review, question or whatever? Then they could have a title which actually relates directly to the subject at hand, rather than pointless artefacts like the 2000 post "GTP Registry Discussion" thread. Does anybody expect people to read all 2000 posts in that thread before posting? If that's not what's expected, why bother having it all as one thread? If that is what's expected then, well, you're expecting too much of people.

 

[buickgnx88]

No, that's the thing I hate about other forums, which is why this is my favorite forum to be at.

You know you can use the search bar at the top of the main forums page, and it will show you results in every subforum.

 

[Austin343]

The problem is that you then have a mess of threads to sort through. Also, in many cases (just look at the GT4 forum, for example), you don't need a separate thread for each time someone asks the same question - the same ground is covered every time, and having a ton of threads wouldn't help anything. The GTP_Registry thread is a good example of that; people are mostly just asking the same few questions over and over again. I agree that some threads are bloated, but overall, having fewer, larger threads works better than having more, shorter threads.

 

[buickgnx88]

Yup yup. One forum I go to frequently is jeepforums.com, and they have it where people just keep posting threads about one specific issue. Basically if you look at one page, it consists of posts from one day, for a span of about 5 hours in some sub-forums. So basically a thread may or may not get answered, and will just float into oblivion while new posts are created in front of it. Heck one of the subforums has over 1000 pages! Now imagine how many similar questions there are.

 

[BobElHat]

Here at GTPlanet, all similar questions end up in the same thread because that's the policy and the forum is well moderated. Stuff gets moved or deleted if it's in the wrong place. If the policy was that you don't start a thread if the question has been answered that too would be enforced, so there wouldn't be a proliferation of useless threads every day asking the same question. GTPlanet is good because it's well moderated, not because everything vaguely related gets dumped into huge threads.

I don't want repeat questions, but nor do I want dozens of different questions on a related topic getting lumped together in one huge, unmanageable thread. I don't want a free-for-all, just a bit more granularity.

 

[Gil]

(by the time I finish typing this I will likely have been "treed" several times...)

The thing is, that EVERYTHING RELATED to any topic that is remotely interesting is already in at least 3 threads: Do a Search on "Tranny Trick" and see how many separate threads come up.
And pretty much we only really get strict about stuff that is related to the games that this forum is dedicated to.
There are pretty much no questions on GT, GT2, GT3, and GT4 that haven't been answered several times in several different threads.
In a year, we'll be asking for the same consideration in GT5P.

Yet you will see multiples on topics such as "What car should I buy?" or "I just got a new car!" or "Happy birthday to" (Heck I've got 3 or 4 birthday threads dedicated to me ), or Fatmouse (one of my personal faves, BTW).

But for threads like "identify this object" or the thread with the funny cat pics, only need one thread.

I will concede that the mods sometimes merge threads that are running so closely on the same subject that they really should be one thread.

I also know that the search feature here is pretty damn good. IF you know the topic you can usually find the post you want fairly quickly. IF you remember who posted it, you can find it literally in a couple of minutes.

The point is that MANY people post stuff (questions about one of the games usually) before the use the search feature to find out if the question at hand has already been answered. I can't begin to tell you how many times I've typed out detailed instruction for doing the "tranny trick". But it has been more than 3 or 4 times.
It wastes bandwidth, and causes needless flaming. All of which could have been avoided by "searching".

 

[BobElHat]

I agree that the problem is people not searching, I just don't think lumping things into one thread is the answer. As Austin343 pointed out, the GTP Registry Discussion thread is full of people asking the same question again and again - that shows that the current policy isn't solving the problem of people not searching. People are asking the same questions again and again in that thread because it's too big to read the whole thing.

I don't know, perhaps neither big threads nor lots of threads are the solution to making information easy to find. An idea I've had in the back of my mind for a while is to have a per-thread "wiki". The best threads have the OP collating information and creating a summary, right in the first post where it's easy to find. When the OP goes the summary dies (see the "Gran Turismo compatible wheels and cockpit index" thread for an example). A per-thread wiki, not a separate page but something appearing at the top of the thread like polls do now, would let anybody update the summary, putting all the good info in one easy-to-find place.

 

[Jordan]

I couldn't agree with you more, BobElHat, and I will be first to admit that this is something which I have not properly addressed while guiding the development of the site. There is no single event that I can point to which shows where this trend began, but I consider our community's thread-stuffing tendencies to be its worst ailment.

A near-perfect example can be found in the Ask GTPlanet forum that I created nearly two years ago. I thought it would invite more general questions (like Yahoo! Answers) that people may not feel comfortable placing in the Rumble Strip. So, what happens? A general questions thread appears and is, subsequently, "stuffed". As a thread, however, it is practically worthless beyond the most recent posts. New questions bury the old, lost in a nearly endless array of anonymous, un-categorized pages. They will probably never be seen again unless the original participants can recall the exact words they posted.

Yet another example is in this very forum, posted just a few days ago. People noticed I changed the look of the quote boxes, and wanted to give me some feedback on them. So, they all posted their comments in a thread about forum deletions... If you ask any of the participants, I'm sure they "didn't feel like that topic deserved its own thread". Of course, once the parasitic topic takes over the thread, there is no turning back. I do not see how this promotes organization, nor do I follow the logic. Regardless, it has probably occurred a thousand times.

The Auto News forum has also seen this effect - I remember a push for all news items to be posted in one single, giant thread. This was such a crippling idea that I intervened directly.

These are just a few examples of the community's near-insistence on breaking the basic structure of the forum/thread format. It tells me that people simply don't feel comfortable making new threads here, and that is a pretty big problem that I haven't really seen anywhere else. I theorize the source of this mentality can be traced back to the Gran Turismo forums. Senior members see new users posting redundant threads like crazy. Understandably, this is irritating, and the importance of careful thread creation is deeply instilled in their posting habits. This is good practice in the GT forums, where thread redundancy is a real issue, but it's quite bad when applied elsewhere.

To be completely honest, I'm not entirely sure how to reverse this phenomenon or I would have done it a long time ago. It is a collectively misguided attempt at organization that has spanned several generations of membership.

With all of that said, I would like to explicitly point out the difference between Gran Turismo forum organization and the rest of the site. My comments here apply to the general forums because this covers a topic that has been on my mind for some time. Most of you who have responded so far have either not taken this into consideration or not made such a declaration. Before the conversation continues, it would be a good distinction for all of us to make.

 

[Rusty*]

I couldn't agree with you more, BobElHat, and I will be first to admit that this is something which I have not properly addressed while guiding the development of the site. There is no single event that I can point to which shows where this trend began, but I consider our community's thread-stuffing tendencies to be its worst ailment.

A near-perfect example can be found in the Ask GTPlanet forum that I created nearly two years ago. I thought it would invite more general questions (like Yahoo! Answers) that people may not feel comfortable placing in the Rumble Strip. So, what happens? A general questions thread appears and is, subsequently, "stuffed". As a thread, however, it is practically worthless beyond the most recent posts. New questions bury the old, lost in a nearly endless array of anonymous, un-categorized pages. They will probably never be seen again unless the original participants can recall the exact words they posted.

Yet another example is in this very forum, posted just a few days ago. People noticed I changed the look of the quote boxes, and wanted to give me some feedback on them. So, they all posted their comments in a thread about forum deletions... If you ask any of the participants, I'm sure they "didn't feel like that topic deserved its own thread". Of course, once the parasitic topic takes over the thread, there is no turning back. I do not see how this promotes organization, nor do I follow the logic. Regardless, it has probably occurred a thousand times.

The Auto News forum has also seen this effect - I remember a push for all news items to be posted in one single, giant thread. This was such a crippling idea that I intervened directly.

These are just a few examples of the community's near-insistence on breaking the basic structure of the forum/thread format. It tells me that people simply don't feel comfortable making new threads here, and that is a pretty big problem that I haven't really seen anywhere else. I theorize the source of this mentality can be traced back to the Gran Turismo forums. Senior members see new users posting redundant threads like crazy. Understandably, this is irritating, and the importance of careful thread creation is deeply instilled in their posting habits. This is good practice in the GT forums, where thread redundancy is a real issue, but it's quite bad when applied elsewhere.

To be completely honest, I'm not entirely sure how to reverse this phenomenon or I would have done it a long time ago. It is a collectively misguided attempt at organization that has spanned several generations of membership.

With all of that said, I would like to explicitly point out the difference between Gran Turismo forum organization and the rest of the site. My comments here apply to the general forums because this covers a topic that has been on my mind for some time. Most of you who have responded so far have either not taken this into consideration or not made such a declaration. Before the conversation continues, it would be a good distinction for all of us to make.

So basically you are saying that member's should create new threads instead of posting there ideas in one 'over-loaded thread'?
Given that there ideas are worthwhile, not something that has already been posted.👍
I have only ever created one thread on GTP all the time I have been here, I have had many great ideas, so maybe I should create new Threads to appropriately express my thoughts, once again I would only do so if my idea had not already been posted( do a search first) and was worthwhile.

On this note...
Dear Jordan,
I have an idea for an addition to GTP's information database, which I have been contemplating for a quite a while now.
My idea is in regards to the way GTPlanet handles information regarding Online teams, the organization we have for our own team GTP is really great, many thanks to Sphinx for his tireless effort in managing this. However when it comes to information regarding other 'International Teams", our organization...leaves something to be desired. Having a comprehensive official information base of other teams that would include details such as, The name of the team, its members and what country there from. This i believe would be a great feature for GTPlanet, it would add to GTPlanets already substantial base of information. I quote:

no Gran Turismo 5 detail goes uncovered

A forum that is titled 'Official International Team Information Database" or words to that effect, could then have sticky threads titled with the teams name and where there from(if aplicable) ie. GTRP[DE].
I have loads of great idea which could really make the thread nice, for example; a map of the globe with all the teams locations marked on it. There is alot of teams out there I understand, so I propose we just try to cover the popular one's for now. However as time goes on and we get to know other teams, that we could continue to expand our information database.👍 GTP is the largest site on the net for all things GT, so I believe this is a necessary addition for GTP. I believe this idea would make GTP the greatest site for Team information. Furthermore as Team building is going to be one of GT5's greatest features, this idea is all the more relevant. If you would like to know more about my suggestion PM me, If you however don't deem it worthwhile of:

GTPlanet, the Gran Turismo authority

then just let me know.
Thankyou for reading this somewhat oversized post.
Peace,
Rusty*

 

[the Interceptor]

I think the general problem lies within GTPlanet being a forum, and not a database. Don't get me wrong, I love this place. But in terms of the raw data we collect about Gran Turismo, it naturally is harder to keep track of it, as this is a discussion forum ... things will be discussed, and not just collected.

A partly solution are FAQ threads, where a single person browses a thread of a part of the forum for certain information, then creates a post with indices to said information. That however is a boatload of work. Also, I understand the idea of making sure people put their carefully-worded threads with proper thread titles in the right sections of GTP. In practice however, this won't work, since not all members will take the time to put up with the forums structure. Again, this is no criticism, as I see it as a general problem of every forum.

A possible solution would be a Wiki that distills all the information posted on GTP. But seriously, who's gonna do that? So why I see a bit of potential for optimisation here and there, I don't see a way to change things big time unless you can GTP as a forum.

 

[Rusty*]

Thanks Interceptor.
I might add something to my post, I would say that the Team details would only be collected for the teams for which we are able to collect information for.
For example if another team's Forum or website has a detailed list of there member's and where there from and they don't mind sharing that list with us, we could then add there team to our 'Team database'. Or maybe they would like in exchange our details aswell, this is a way we can build on 'inter-team' friendlyness and respect for other team driver's. Not that we don't respect othe team member's already however this might help us get to know and share information with other teams. I already have information regarding a Team that I am friendly with. This collection of information may be a fair task but it doesn't have to happen over night, and I would be willing to help in anyway possible to this idea...as it is my idea.👍
Peace,
Rusty*

 

[niky]

I admin (or have adminned) several other forums... and the number of duplicate thread topics is terrible, at times.

You can't help it... forum gets older, more junk in the database.

I actually prefer it this way... sure, you get directed to a 100 or more page thread... but if there's something particular in the thread you want, you can go to thread tools and search within the thread.

But otherwise, the problem is, as said... that this is a forum. Forums are like that. Some are just as well organized as here... some are worse.

 

[Duke]

I actually prefer it this way... sure, you get directed to a 100 or more page thread... but if there's something particular in the thread you want, you can go to thread tools and search within the thread.

And that's why I've done my part to have people post in existing threads rather than start new ones.

I also do not like the "general questions" threads because they do get too long and involved and non-specific in their topics. However, proper use of the Search function allows you to mine those threads for information, even if it is not as convenient.

Unfortunately, the phenomenon is this: the people who say "I didn't think I should start a new thread for this" are the ones who are likely to be asking a thoughtful question that does merit its own thread. It's the people who barge ahead without a thought and post the 723rd "What car..." or "How do I..." thread that should edit themselves but do not, and both staff and users respond to that failing.

There should not be a culture that is against making new threads. But we (myself definitely included) need to propagate a culture of thinking before you create a new thread.

 

[BobElHat]

A possible solution would be a Wiki that distills all the information posted on GTP. But seriously, who's gonna do that? So why I see a bit of potential for optimisation here and there, I don't see a way to change things big time unless you can GTP as a forum.

It is a problem with forums in general, but I don't think you'd have to can the forum structure entirely to solve it, or at least improve the situation. That's why I suggested a Wiki integrated into the thread structure. Not a full Wiki, really just an option to create a "zeroth" post (ie. before the first post) which anyone can edit. Then the entire community could edit it, so you wouldn't have to rely on one person as you do with a first-post summary or FAQ thread.

Full Wikis work fine too, perhaps there is a place for a GTPlanet Wiki. Who's going to do it? Everybody and anybody, that's how Wikis work and they really do work. The EEEUser community has a forum and a Wiki and good information from forum posts does generally find its way to the Wiki. A Wiki page might start with a copy & paste of a relevant post (not necessarily by the poster), which is quick and easy for anybody to do, that then gets edited over time into something more structured.

I don't think it would be a total solution to the problems of huge threads and repeat questions, but with the good community and dedicated moderators here, and in combination with a shift in culture to encourage more granularity in threads, it I believe it could work and would make better use of the collective wisdom here at GTPlanet.

 

[TB]

perhaps there is a place for a GTPlanet Wiki.

Click Guides at the top of every page.

 

[BobElHat]

Well, you learn something new every day! I had seen the Guides but never noticed they were a Wiki. For whatever reason, nobody seems to be adding much content - only one person has made any edits in the past week.

[edit]: I wonder if that's just down to the name? "Guides" says to me that I'll find guides to the games - the kind of things that are there now like track lists. It doesn't suggest that I can edit it, or that it would be the right place to put things like a list of compatible wheels or signup instructions for GTP Registry. Those are the kinds of things which I think would work well as Wiki pages, but are currently served only by forum threads.

 

[Pupik]

I'm going to thrown by two cents in this, having been a member for nearly 7 years...

I am a little disappointed in the trend away from new threads; however we have had a Catch-22 situation in a lot of our forums and sub-forums:

1) We encourage, and have in return, been told as members, to use the Search, rather than create new threads about topics that have been discussed ad infinitum. Examples are the "...black LM cars in GT4?", "...quickest way to make credits...", and "...how to get the (prize) car..." that do NOT need another thread, unless it actually has never been discussed before.

2) People like to get quick-questions-and-answers within a thread; I've even done this before. Thread starters like to see lots of reads and responses, it makes them "feel good", I suppose. It starts a sub-community, if you will.

The search feature helps out a lot with this, except for one major flaw: If you do not know exactly what terminology to use for a search, your results may not appear. But a little experience with forum search engines can help out a lot. By knowing what terms are used and substituted for other commonly used words, due to language gaps or regional differences, you will get better results. Sometimes, you may may need to preform a general inspection of many threads and even more posts. I understand the frustration with this, as none of us were born with innate knowledge of Gran Turismo games.

But the more you stick with the forums, as opposed to the 90% of our hit-and-run (I do not mean this in a negative way) members that found what they were looking for, and left for good, or became distracted by something else. Jordan discussed this phenomenon, as it is widespread throughout the entire web of forums, wikis, and discussion boards.

I think another aspect is the way we find and expect information on the Internet; rarely does a less-than-obscure item with your favorite search engine result in anything other than the exact web page or Wikipedia. We get the results right away, or at least a basic framework for a topic. A discussion board presents its information, presented by several/many people in the order that the posts arrive in the order of the thread. It may mean the information does not rise to the top immediately, but only after dozens and dozens of posts later.

There honestly is little need for huge discussion threads, and it is a trend that has continued that also makes me shake my head. Are people honestly afraid to start a new thread? New members have no problem with this, but few threads should continue on past 100 posts, except for breaking news, ongoing events, and for opportunities or discussions in which there are a lot of opinions and kudos to go around. Examples like the "Meeting with K.Y. himself...", or the "US Presidential Election" threads are acceptably long threads.

With that said, we cannot enforce the thread length by closing it, unless it is far out of topic, or the information is no longer valid to anyone. To do so for no reason, would be arbitrary and unfair, in my opinion. Some threads do not need more than 10 posts, when the question is answered properly; others can go on indefinitely, for reasons discussed before. Some people feel the need to update us on every little detail of their lives, or their cars, or their games, no matter how important nor trivial, and so it becomes normal for threads to take on lives of their own.

Once I became a moderator, I have merged threads together, because sometimes it's interesting as a community to see how members change and how the past relates to the present. Other times, we have two concurrent discussion threads that are better suited together, rather than apart. We strive to make information easier to find, and sometimes it is best to search within one thread, rather than through 10 threads. But in the great scheme of things, moderators merge less than 1% of all the threads contributed, and lock (close) perhaps the same percentage of threads.

Lastly, the problem of the Game Guides, which are sorely underutilized and contributed to. I'm not sure why, but perhaps the formatting of the content, and the "lack of credit" are possible reasons the GT-wiki is not as popular as it should and as helpful as it can be. But it can be a tremendous resource for fans of the GT games, as long as it is kept in a easy-to-read format and some standardization is kept in place, mostly to prevent vandalism and to spot easily-made errors.

BobElHat, I want to thank you for bringing this up. I fully agree that the habit of vague discussion threads are unnecessary, but short of poking everyone with a stick telling them to stay on topic all the time, it is time-consuming to hint at every member all the time. We try to enforce the obviously out-of-place-topics within the thread as best we can.

 

[BobElHat]

It looks like I was wrong about huge threads being a policy here, it seems it's just the culture that has evolved. Seeing how well moderated the site is, I just assumed that the balance between big threads and many threads was by design. I guess the influence it's possible to exert on such a large community is perhaps not as extensive as I thought. Herding cats springs to mind

Thanks for making it clear that it's not site policy that's the root of the problem. It's reassuring that the site owner and (at least some) mods and admins share some of my concerns. As a new member (though I've read the site on and off for a few years) the impression I get is that starting new threads is strongly discouraged - there just seem to be a lot more locked threads and huge threads than "your question might be best asked in a new thread" or "can we keep this thread on topic" comments (which don't necessarily have to come from mods). I do see the latter, just not as much as the former.

 

[Duke]

...there just seem to be a lot more locked threads and huge threads than "your question might be best asked in a new thread" or "can we keep this thread on topic" comments (which don't necessarily have to come from mods). I do see the latter, just not as much as the former.

Well, that's partly an issue with the dynamics of how this forum has grown, as well. Gran Turismo is released cyclically, with a buildup of pre-release hype and hunger for information, followed by a period of high activity as users work their way through each new game release. Each crest in the cycle has led to an exponential increase in the number of new users posting, and also has led to many of those new users being in a tearing hurry to get their answer or show their excitement NOW.

So historically, we've had much more problem with multiple copies of the same (often inane) questions being asked in new threads simply because it is the fastest way for a user with a short attention span to make some visible effect. Not necessarily the best way to get the desired information, but definitely the fastest and easiest way to get instant gratification. Those of us who do not need instant gratification (and who have been here a while) tend to get annoyed with people who DO need it when they impose on our good will and helpfulness to satisfy their burning need for a quick easy answer.

As I said above, I don't think anyone here has purposely tried to suppress the creation of new threads... just the creation of new stupid threads. If the fallout of that has been to create an atmosphere forbidding to all new threads, we'll all need to improve that.

 

[Jordan]

Dear Jordan,
I have an idea for an addition to GTP's information database, which I have been contemplating for a quite a while now.
[...]
Thankyou for reading this somewhat oversized post.
Peace,
Rusty*

It's a good suggestion, Rusty, and I will be happy to discuss it with you, but I must point out the irony of your post... What exactly does it have to do with the topic of this thread?

Well, you learn something new every day! I had seen the Guides but never noticed they were a Wiki. For whatever reason, nobody seems to be adding much content - only one person has made any edits in the past week.

[edit]: I wonder if that's just down to the name? "Guides" says to me that I'll find guides to the games - the kind of things that are there now like track lists. It doesn't suggest that I can edit it, or that it would be the right place to put things like a list of compatible wheels or signup instructions for GTP Registry. Those are the kinds of things which I think would work well as Wiki pages, but are currently served only by forum threads.

The name was largely chosen for SEO reasons. There's a lot more people searching for GT Guides than GT Wikis!

Explicitly calling the Guides a "wiki" would make its functionality more clear, I agree. However, I sense that you are, like me, very comfortable with the web, and it is easy to forget how unfamiliar the majority of people would be with the terminology. The word "wiki" has no meaning to even some of my geekier friends. Despite the popularity of Wikipedia, I think very few actually make the connection with other services bearing its name. As a matter of fact, I have literally shocked a group of very intelligent, young, trendy, and web-aware people by demonstrating that you can directly edit Wikipedia's content.

Regardless of the name, I had high hopes for it to become a very popular and extremely useful section of the site. Despite being in service for several years, however, I have lost hope. Users of the the last version of GTPlanet will probably remember the 'Guides Editor' badge that users could display below their posts and link to their Guides profile. Even this system of recognition and integration did nothing to encourage participation despite strong overall site growth.

The MediaWiki software has also hurt the development of the guides, with what I consider to be a confusing user interface and bizarre formatting. After some recent vandalism, I closed new account registration, and by the time the next version of GTPlanet rolls around (GTPX), I will probably drop user contributions to that area entirely. It simply will not work with our visitors.

As I said above, I don't think anyone here has purposely tried to suppress the creation of new threads... just the creation of new stupid threads. If the fallout of that has been to create an atmosphere forbidding to all new threads, we'll all need to improve that.

👍 Exactly, this is one instance where all of us should begin leading by example. We, as moderators and administrators, also need to get more comfortable with using the "Split Thread" features (I'll be first to admit that, in 8 years, I've used it maybe twice). Forum design could also play its part, from the thread prefixes/tagging that I discussed in the moderation forum last week, to showing the user's forum thread count in their posts.* There are several different tools that we could examine.

* Thread counts would only be visible to "active" members who have already made a significant contribution to the site and (hopefully) understand basic forum etiquette. This could result in less apprehension and more encouragement to create a new topic.

 

[Sage]

(GTPX)

OooOOoooh…

 

[Blake]

GTPlanet [is] a forum, and not a database.

[/thread]

 

[Rusty*]

It's a good suggestion, Rusty, and I will be happy to discuss it with you, but I must point out the irony of your post... What exactly does it have to do with the topic of this thread? ...

Well the first part of my post was actually right 'on topic', it was basically a question on how to in-short sum up your post. I do hope alot of GTP members read this thread as it is important if we are to actually make a difference. I understand all the talking on a subject such as this is key to the beginning of a better 'Forum culture?', but unless it can be seen by those it is directed at, there is no hope of change. This is why I thought a post putting in-short regarding what your concerns where might get read more as it shorter. I know that alot of people just skip long posts, so this was the reason I posted what I did.👍
Also regarding my suggestion, I have created a new thread in this site feedback forum.
Cheers,
Rusty*