Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

POLL: What should the maximum number of posts in a thread be?

Didn’t you realise Tom - I already have. it’s here : http://reflector.sota.org.uk/t/current-propagation-conditions-some-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel/16286

1 Like

Ah - excellent. Nice work Ed. Have you let Mike know?

Though just looking at it, it is already a hotchpotch of different topics and musings (including a couple of my own) - and the “Light at the End of the Tunnel” component of the thread title disappears in normal view on the SOTAwatch summary page.

So for Mike’s continuing activation reports, I’d still recommend a “Light at the End of the Tunnel 2” thread, started by Mike himself. Entirely up to him though, and if he prefers to add his next activation reports and musings to your thread Ed, then that works well too.

That sounds almost as if you object to the idea of polling the participants, Mike!

We had about 1270 threads active this year. One thread hit the 500 limit and was closed automatically. One was a duplicate congratulations topic and the two were merged. One was closed because it had degenerated into snark. Three out of 1270 is not bad, and only one of the 1270 was closed because of the behaviour of participants. When I took over as moderator I determined at the outset that the reflector would never be allowed to degrade into the sort of name calling, sarcasm and stupid squabbling that characterises some of the big American sites, such as the Zed, eham or the Island. I have enforced the AUP and kept the reflector as friendly, helpful and ham-spirited as possible, and the very few participants that have been permanently excluded for bad behaviour were given three strikes before they were out.

You refer to Social Media, and I suppose you are thinking of SOTA(FE) . As I have said before, FE is an excellent site within its limitations and does a good job - as long as you excuse its one major eccentricity, its policy of banning members of the SOTA management team. This allows certain participants to bad-mouth the MT and its members whenever they feel like it, without any right of reply, and the spreading of disinformation without any chance of corrections from the horses mouth. Free expression, it seems, is extended to everybody except those running SOTA! Well, their site, their rules, perverse though it seems, but it nicely illustrates the limitations of social media…

Anyway, I hope you start up “Son of Light at the End of the Tunnel”.

Not at all Brian, I’m all in favour of having polls, especially for vacancies on the MT.

As for SOTA(FE) , it is well documented why it was set-up…

As for your claims about bad mouthing the MT, you’re clearly not reading SOTA(FE)

1 Like

Seems to me any thread that takes itself past a hundred posts or so while still more or less covering the same topic probably deserves a category or sub-category of its own, into which it can be sliced and diced as appropriate (because it’s almost certainly covering distinct but related stuff). Any thread of that size that wanders off in multiple random directions just deserves to be sliced and diced.

Of course, there’s a balance to be struck, but if the limit is lower and known to be lower, maybe folk would start new child-threads (linking back to the parent) more often?

[quote=“K6WRU, post:32, topic:16292”]So what are we fixing?[/quote]For me (and I do use this system on slow network links and/or ancient computer hardware at times) the main problem is that long threads make for tedious navigation.

Have you already thought about limiting the number of posts per contributor and thread? Just an idea …

We (MT) were not really interested in limiting the number of posts or threads anyone can make. The reason behind limiting thread length is that it becomes harder for the many people to navigate the long threads, especially long threads with longer posts and pictures. Performance also is poor on older devices.

Last chance to vote on this issue is today. Place your vote at the top of this thread.

OK, no strong preference, but as an occasional user of slow devices, I am persuaded by that argument for a limit. Especially since few threads extend beyond 100 posts, and if they do, then starting a new thread to continue the discussion is very simple.
Plus, it would be nice to get the number of voters to 100 :smile:

1 Like

I voted for 100 just to be the 100th voter. I agree that on a phone it can be a pain wading through long threads so 100 actually does make sense.

But suppose a thread reaches 100 and continues as a mark 2 thread. Referring back to post number 50 on thread mark one would be an even worse pain!:wink:

But probably only the moderator would likely need to do that :wink:

In accordance with this poll result, we have now set the maximum number of posts in any thread, to be 100.

Topics can still carry on of course - just start a new thread and call it “Old Thread 2” or something like that! Adding a hyperlink at the end of the old thread that points to the new (continuation) one would be helpful, as would the reverse in the initial post of that new/continuation thread.

Thanks everyone for your votes and comments.

Another good example of why democracy is overrated.


There speaks a man who backed the wrong horse.

The oft-cited alternative of benign dictatorship is equally flawed.

It is. But SOTA’s “benevolent dictatorship” is perfect :wink:

All dictators believe so… :slight_smile:

1 Like

Maybe we should offer that nice Mr. Mugabe a seat on the MT? I believe he has a lot more free time nowadays and maybe he’s looking for something to keep him busy during his retirement.

1 Like

Try him out as AM of Zimbabwe first…?

1 Like