Threading

[altenbach]

I would vote to eliminate the "sort by threading" option and only retain "oldest to newest" and "newest to oldest". If somebody sorts by threading and there is a new answer in the middle of a multipage thread, he will most likely never see it.

(Sorting by threading only makes sense if the posts are shown in a tree structure as can be done on some other boards.)

HOWEVER, we need some hints about threading, so if there is a barrage of posts, we need to know what is related to what. I suggest that whenever a post is not in reply of the post right before it, it should have a link to the post it is replying to.

For example:

---

Post A (by user 1)

This is great!

Post B (by user 2)

This is all completely wrong!

Post C (by user 3)

--- in response to "user 1" ( insert link to post A) ---   <<<<<HERE!

I agree!

Makes sense? This would also eliminate the need to constantly quote posts when replying.

[Ray.R]

I agree..  I never use Sort by Threading...  they always show up as unread... but I tend to be too lazy to search for that reply which is embedded somewhere..  😉

[Ben]

Yes toss by threading.

I don't know how to put in links to replies within a thread. Depending on how users have their preferences set, clicking on the post number may or may not work.

Ben

[Gabi1]

i totally agree. count my vote in 🙂

[Laura F.]

So I haven't investigated to find out if it is possible to turn threading off, but I imagine that there are some people that might actually use it.  By default, a new user has their account set up to sort messages oldest to newest, so it should not be a problem for a person brand new to the forum.  I'm not sure that taking away the option is necessary.

I like the suggestion of being able to tell what message a person is replying to in a long thread.  I will add that to my suggestion list.

Thanks,
Laura