AOTC Redundancy - Linking to existing threads

Thank you for the kind words, pooh. Best of luck to you on the exam .

 

Thanks pooh. I think I understand what you're saying.

I rarely come out and say "this is redundant". Usually, I leave it up to the MOD or the user to decide whether something is redundant. Sometimes, I only link to things because I feel that it could help out the discussion. I hope that people don't take things personally.

And "fastest link poster" is in my profile, not my signature I'm just glad that some people recognize and appreciate what we do. I may not have something relavent to add to a discussion, but I may think that something that was said in another thread is relavent. So, I'll post a link. I read a lot of the discussions that take place here. If I have something relavent to say, I'll say it. If not, I'll move on to the next discussion.

Recently, I've been heading over to the community forums more often, just to relax and have some fun. I've also been participating in discussions in the AOTC forum more. After all, we all come here to have fun and relax. I don't want this to seem like a job. I want to have fun, and forget about whatever is going on in the real world.

I agree, not all new threads are redundant. There have been some great discussions resulting from new threads in the past few days, such as "Has AOTC re-united you with family or friends?", "Fear: Where Do You Draw the Line?", and "The Mythology of ATTACK OF THE CLONES", to name a few. There also have been a few fun threads, such as "Dexter's Diner: The AOTC Forum Social Thread!", and "Another order of Two All-Beef Padmés". These types of threads are the reason that I started coming to these boards in the first place. These discussions are either fun, or serious, without having to be redundant.

 

Beware -- spam to follow.


ive seen the movie, and the green life saber is really yodas from the begining, it all makes sense green and green. In the third installment yodas life saber is now blue? That raises the question could yoda turn blue? THen if we think ahead to the empire strikes back, he is green again with a stick.
what do you guys think
please reply

A thread that will never be redundant. The prophet chewycharmy was one of a kind.

Ok, you can go about your business.

 

Well put, Darth Pooh. I think I see where you are coming from with this. I think ego does get in the way sometimes--I already mentioned this to YJ. I think sometimes, with both of us, our ego can get the better of us and sometimes it does turn into a "competition", if you will. YJ knows what I am talking about

I have never once said "This is redundant". I try to post links that are relevant to the material which is being discussed. If it is redundant, and I KNOW it is, I may tell a moderator. If I am unsure, I find a link which deals with the subject and then leave it up to the moderator to decide whether or not to lock it.

And YodaJeff has a great point when he says, we don't try to act like this is a job that we do. We are simply trying to help out the forum to make it a more enjoyable and fun place to post in. You have to admit, if there are 3 redundant threads, it can get a little old and very annoying. I don't know why people get so defensive about this issue. We are only trying to help out the forum. I am here almost all day checking for threads that I might be able to get relevant information. If you've noticed recently, YJ and I have formed a "team" in a sense . I am here in the morning, he takes over in the afternoon, and then we both handle evening and late night.

If we didn't have people doing these types of things the forum would be a mess and the mods would have a lot more to do. And I respect the opinion that the other, larger thread could be locked to bring in a different point of view--and I completely agree. It's just that most of the time the thread in question is an essential rewording of its predecessor. Because of this I have seen no situation where the original thread could be locked and the new one remain open. But, now that you've mentioned that, I'll keep it in mind. It would be nice to get some wonderful, new opinions on an old topic.

And I agree, people are narrowing the general topics down, and that's why I try not to refer people to official threads anymore, because those were very general. I try to give reference links to some more, recent, detailed discussion about the topic. But I think things are improving a little. Last night, after I posted a link, the creator of the thread thanked me (which is VERY rare in that case). But AOTC isn't just all serious discussion, because as YJ said, we have some great, relaxing threads in there too, which aren't redundant. I think we are helping the forum, but maybe not in the manner some people want.

 

While I do appreciate the occasionaly link every now and then to something that is obviously or even bordering on redundnacy, some of the links provided are to threads with very broad topics. I can understand a single thread for Sifo-Dyas or just one for the box office totals, there not many directions these topics can go off to. However, linking to something like the Official Action Scenes thread is just a waste of time in my mind. There are way way to many action sequences in AOTC to keep a clear single-direction discussion. Too many conversations can sprout off on these general threads, and it can make it hard to follow, especially if you haven't been on since the begining. If someone has a question about the Dooku/Anakin duel, don't give them a link where the current discussion is the Coruscant chase (I'm not reflecting on something specific, just hopethetical). I'm not sure if I made my point, but what I'm basically trying to say is "Don't over do it". I don't mind having multiple threads as long as that aren't on the exact same topic ask the exact same question. My last count in the Ep3 forum found about 12 threads of Padme's death specualtion...not that's just rediculous.

 

This is not a problem that lies in the AOTC board only. I realize that it is most prominent there, but it is equally annoying elsewhere.

Alright, pooh, you said don't quote you, but I have not choice.

I honestly believe that "linking" and finding links instead of joining the discussion is an "anti-social" enterprise.

This would be true if all someone did was post links and never posted anything pertaining to the discussion. Personally, I try to link the redundant posters to the pre-existing thread, where I am already taking part in the exact same conversation. If someone can give one good reason to have more than one of the same discussion...I'm listening.

Frankly, once a redundant thread's been posted...you have two threads: one which has to be locked. But you could lock the old one as well! Why don't we?

If we threw the laws against redundancy out the window (which is exactly what we would be doing in this case), there would be chaos, mass disorder. Why don't we lock the old thread? Because it is the thread being used for the discussion. It was the original, and unless it exceeds 5,000 posts, there is no reason to lock it because someone else started a new one on the exact same thing. As it has been said, it is very easy to simply review the recent posts of a thread to get the gist of what is going on. It is not at all necessary to read an entire thread to be able to contribute one's thoughts.

Whether you are made mod, or whether you pat yourself on the back for being the fastest, you are always getting "something out of it for yourself."

Everyone is not out for themselves in this case. It is not my "job" in the sense that I am not a mod, but being a moderator should not be the only basis for trying to help out with the organization and easy flow of things on the boards. If I were to post a redundant or out of place thread, I would be pleased for a nice member to direct me to the right place.

This, of course, also requires a certain style and amount of tact. One can't flame the poster for starting such a thread. Instead, I generally try to answer the question in short (if possible), and link them to the proper place with a smile.

I, too, have been receiving negative response to this lately. I suppose this is understandable. People do not want to feel as though they are being ostracized. However, they can easily avoid this by reading the rules and making the minor effort it takes to do a little background on the topic they are wanting to create.

For example, I will never understand why someone can get so upset with me for linking their "Why I loved TPM" threads out of the EP3 forum and to TPM. Common sense...anyone?

Ki-Edi-Mundi: My last count in the Ep3 forum found about 12 threads of Padme's death specualtion...not that's just rediculous.

This is precisely what I am referring to. There is no reason for this. In NSA, one can look back on the first 5 pages and find all of the topics that one would imagine creating for non-spoilers. And if not, then more power to them for starting the new thread. But it irks me that they can't look down on the first page and see the Episode III: Padmé thread or the Fate of Padmé thread. So, what do they do? Start a How will Padmé die? or the like thread. It's a matter of common sense and common courtesy to the other members of the board.

I don't think that anyone here wants to eliminate "newness" or "fresh" ideas. The fact remains, however, that the majority of these "fresh" ideas are already existing, waiting on page three for someone to bring them back to life. There's no reason to start a new thread just because someone hasn't posted in the older one in a couple of days.

 

I concur with most of what's being said here. I was one individual who posted links to earlier threads without wanting "recognition." I never changed my sig or anything like that to accomodate this practice. I agree that at some points it can become a game of sorts to redirect and no one ever really gets to discuss something because they're constantly being redirected.

You have to wonder, how many times that you redirect a thread does it ever end up blossoming in the other thread? Rarely. Therefore, if it appears that it's just something to discuss, I redirect to the earlier thread because a conversation like that has already occurred, and most likely in great detail. However, if it's just a question or concern, there's no reason to redirect the individual because they can have their question or concern met in a matter of minutes, and then locked without fear of having to find an answer in the annals of the JC.

Redirecting is fine, helpful even, when used with adequate discretion.

 

As a relatively new poster on these boards I appreciate users who point out links to past threads as it saves being flamed by older posters for posting in the wrong place. I have also begun to try and post a link to a past thread if I know it exists, as I know it to be helpful.
As for it being a competition, does it really matter if it is or isn't, the quicker the correct thread is pointed out the better as it prevents future confusion over which thread was the original one (when both threads grow to reasonably large sizes it cn be hard to tell as to which one to post in).
I do belive though that rather than jumping in and saying
"stupid newb go here " (i havent seen this from anyone but I am sure it happens)
it is helpful when the person pointing out the link, gives an small comment or opinion on the topic and then mentions that they also might like to try for further discussions on teh same topic. If people don't heed the link and continue in teh same topic then it should be left to the mods.

But as I said this doesn't annoy me but what does it the users who jump in, add a comment or shout "this is redundant" before instructing a mod to lock the thread in a post. This is definately not a normal posters job, aa pm to a mod yes but a public announcement, is both annoying and insulting to both mods and other posters.

 

I guess I can see how people might see this as being annoying. But it is far less annoying than the people who write "Redundant", " ", "Locked in 3... 2... 1...", or "+1". At least we are giving the people somewhere to go to continue their discussion. Again, I leave it up to the mods or the original poster to decide if it is redundant. I am just trying to help the discussions. I do not want what people said a few days ago to be ignored, just because someone has the exact same idea today.

 

I agree with YJ. We never say "lock this thread" or any of the other things that he mentioned. All we do is post link to topics that deal with the topic of interest, that's all. We are only trying to help, we aren't trying to suck up or anything else.

 

and can I say how much I appreciate it? you guys make my life a lot easier. Yes, I have refrained from locking some threads even though links to threads have been posted simply b/c that thread brings up interesting points that might not fall into the realm of the other thread. On the other hand, I once locked three threads in a row on exactly the same topic...and the official thread was FIVE down on the FIRST page.

 

Kinda ironic that Mr. himself is now a Mod huh?

Just kidding Grifz we luv ya

 

Finally a dissenting opinion in this thread.

I personally think there's nothing wrong with posting links in threads for non-moderators. But when you make it your personal duty to "clean up" these boards by posting links, I think it goes too far.

When I see a redundant topic, I don't even bother posting a link because I know who will be by soon enough to post them. Why don't you guys just relax just for a second and let the mods take care of it? Or do it sparingly. I just think you guys go a little overboard.

I checked your last few posts on your profile, and the majority of them are links this, links that. Do you honestly enjoy doing this? The boards survived without certain people posting links, and they will survive when you leave. Just cool it, is all I'm asking. But since the mods seem to "like" it, maybe there's nothing I can do.

After all, GriffZ started out just like you two, and look what happened to him. But hey, in his defense, I actually knew how he stood on many issues except associating him with the lock N***.

DS

 

Perhaps the policy should be first come first served, one per thread, no refunds, etc.

 

I think that the linking is a good thing, but like a few people have said here, it gets carried away sometimes. On pretty much every thread, the 2nd to 5th post down is usually a link from one of the so called "lock nazis". I can see posting links in threads that are overly redundant, like anything that has to do with the Sidious/Palpatine debate, or discussion on who Sifo Dias is, but just because someone mentions something about acting in their thread, doesn't mean it needs to be redirected to the ***OFFICIAL ACTING THREAD***. I do think you guys are helpful, but sometimes it is a little overdone, and I think if you take a look at it you won't disagree. Be helpful, but not at the expense of making enemies and ruining what could be a good thread.

 

FINALLY someone agrees with me. Amen, brother.

Are you listenin' Adoniah and YodaJeff?

DS

 

Yes, I'm listening. If you haven't noticed, I've been linking less often the past few days. Things are settling down a little bit. I agree, new posts are sometimes only partly redundant. I'll admit, there are times that I posted links that I shouldn't have. Sometimes, I only link to a thread because similar things have been said there. The links are to be used as references. I don't come out and say "This is redundant." I will say "You can find some existing discussion on the topic at the following threads:" Then, a mod must make the decision whether or not it is redundant. If the mod chooses to keep the thread open, so be it. I think it is more helpful having links, then when a mod just locks a thread and says "Redundant. Go to the Official (whatever) thread".

I realize it may be annoying to go to another thread to discuss the topic at hand, but I'm pretty sure that's why the mods decided to create all those official threads in the beginning of May.

 

...Sometimes, I only link to a thread because similar things have been said there. The links are to be used as references. I don't come out and say "This is redundant." I will say "You can find some existing discussion on the topic at the following threads:"...

The only problem is some people view that as telling them they shouldn't be posting a new thread and are stupid for not posting their topic on an existing thread. I understand where you are coming from, but I think a lot of people take it personally, and it leaves the impression that you think you are better than them because you think you know where the topic should be discussed. Then, when the mods come around and lock the thread, their feelings are hurt even more and it creates tension between you and the person who's thread was locked.

My own personnal opinion, as stated before, is that it becomes very annoying when a new thread pops up and the first response is a link to another thread. As hard as it may be to try not to be helpful, please only supply links when the thread is very obviously redundant.

If you haven't noticed, I've been linking less often the past few days.

Thanks.

 

See, here's the thing. People yell at us for linking in many new thread and tell us we make newbies afraid to post new topics. Well, as mentioned before in many thread, ask YodaJeff or I if a topic has been posted. I guarantee you that we will know

And I admit, some links I shouldn't have posted, and I try to keep it to threads that could use a reference or, if it is a complete redundant thread, a redirect to another thread. I never tell a mod to "LOCK THIS THREAD!!". I kindly give people references to their topic of interest.

And like Liz said, the mods can choose to keep some threads open if they may have interesting discussion. I only post things to help you. I think a better discussion could be started if you looked at some previous discussion rather than posting it out of the dark. Thus, like I said, it is only for help. And like YJ said, it is up to the mods to lock it or not to.

 

I understand where you're coming from, but i don't think some people on the boards appreciate the so called "helpfullness." See my previous post.

Anyways, earlier on the AOTC forum I noticed someone asked about Depa Billaba. They were wondering if she was in AOTC and if she got killed. Instead of someone giving them an answer, they were redirected to another thread and their thread was locked. Now there was nothing wrong with locking the thread, but what would have been wrong with giving a simple answer? Not to mention the thread they were redirected to is 25 pages long. Basically my point is that if you want to be helpful, why not give the poster an answer and then redirect them...it will save them a lot of time...that way they don't have to dig through pages and pages of other junk that they have no interest in.

 

Usually, if it's a simple question, I'll try to give an answer. If it is some sort of discussion, I don't want to say anything else, because the discussion belongs in the other thread.

I hope what I just wrote makes sense.

 

Wow, hey Sebulba-Dug, are you inside my head or something? Cause we sure are on the same wavelength.

I'm glad you're taking our words to heart YJ and Adoniah. I hope you guys do stop linking as much as you do, I'd sure enjoy hearing your thoughts on common AOTC themes rather than seeing your links posted throughout the boards.

Thanks for listening to us.

DS

 

Have you guys ever thought that newbies aren't lazy, they just don't know that there's so much activity or so many redundant threads? It seems to make sense to me. They're newbies, of course they don't know that they're expected to check for threads about what their question is about. They just think, I'll post a question and get an answer. Don't get irritated at them so easily.

BTW, this isn't directed at everyone, just those people who say that they're so freaking irritated that these newbies are so lazy.

 

If you see a link, leave it at that, like BYOB suggested. But then, most of the time a few people end up posting them at the same time.

I know that each mod has a prefered preference, but like cbj said, sending along a PM with multiple links, or just sending PM after PM when you see them can be easier since it means that threads aren't derailed by posts like that. I know that I prefer getting PMs since it's easier for me on a slow connection.

 

So are you saying we shouldn't be posting links, but rather PM mods? See, my only problem with that is then the poster would have no reference. By posting links, they have a place to go to check out different views.

And I have said this before; I never say that a thread is redundant in a thread. Some people go into a thread and say "2...1...locked" which is very rude. I go into a thread trying to help the poster find some more discussion. And I never said that newbies are lazy or stupid. They are what their name is; new. Because they are new YodaJeff and I strive to help them out, especially when they do post redundant threads. It's not only newbies either.

Well, I'm not going to sit here and point fingers. The point is that all I am trying to do is help.