Double posts

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
I'm not a moderator so I have absolutely no authority but I've been noticing more and more double, triple and quadruple posts recently. I just thought I'd bring it to everyone's attention that you can make posts with more than a single quote in them by pressing pressing the quote button.





I just thought I'd start this thread for people who didn't know about it. I find the quickest way to make multiple quotes is to press reply on the first thing you want to quote and then scrolling down to the bottom of that reply page to copy another member's post. Then, once that has been copied into the subsequent (second) quote tags, type =poster's username after the first quote tag and before the square bracket. :)


the madness that is me said:
It'll look much neater than double posts.

the madness that is me said:
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
Whyren said:
Would there be any way for the "New Posts" search to take into account the time that a message was edited, thus signifying new content?

If someone edits their post then it goes back to being bold (appears unread) although it doesn't jump to the front of the New Posts queue. Agreed, that'd be cool if it did.

I have to admit that I've double-posted three times before, to bring attention to the fact that I got something wrong or was misleading in my original post. :eek:
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
I've noticed it a lot lately, too, as if some people are hurrying toward an avatar. Even those who are quite experienced still double-post rather than take the time to combine their responses.

You may have seen "posts next to each other" in the edit information of various posts lately. I've been combining those which can be combined.

It just seems that if people are in such a hurry that you have to make 3 posts in 3 minutes, those people probably aren't saying much.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,388
42
1123.6536.5321
Yes, I hear ya mad jew. I make a point to report these types of posts all the time to the Mods, who are no doubt sick of reading my reports by now. :eek: ;)

The Mods are busy enough as they are, and cannot be everywhere, so I try and do my part and report these types of things as much as possible, just to keep the Forums clean.
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
bousozoku said:
You may have seen "posts next to each other" in the edit information of various posts lately. I've been combining those which can be combined.

That's partly what made me start the thread. I've noticed you've been combining quite a few of them recently. It's appreciated. :)


~Shard~ said:
The Mods are busy enough as they are, and cannot be everywhere, so I try and do my part and report these types of things as much as possible, just to keep the Forums clean.

Just as a side note, do the moderators get annoyed by us reporting bad posts or do they like it? I'm always a bit hesitant because I don't want to make them have to work even harder.


There's nothing quite like a clean forum. :D
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,388
42
1123.6536.5321
mad jew said:
That's partly what made me start the thread. I've noticed you've been combining quite a few of them recently. It's appreciated. :)
Yes it is nice to see the Mods addressing this issue. :)

mad jew said:
Just as a side note, do the moderators get annoyed by us reporting bad posts or do they like it? I'm always a bit hesitant because I don't want to make them have to work even harder.
I once asked out good Doctor Q that question, and he indicated to me that it was not a problem at all. He said that, as I mentioned above, the Mods can't be everyone at once, and appreciate the help. This was his feelings, at least.

So, as a result, I am quite liberal in my bad post reporting. I like to consider myself a "MacRumors Policeman". ;) I try to only report legitimate issues, as not to waste anyone's time, but I still end up reporting a lot of posts regardless, it seems like. :)

Just trying to keep the Forums clean, and cut down on "pattern behavior" like double posting, responding to old polls, responding with short replies/emoticons/LOLs and so forth - to me, that's all garbage which should be dealt with accordingly. :cool:
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
mad jew said:
That's partly what made me start the thread. I've noticed you've been combining quite a few of them recently. It's appreciated. :)





Just as a side note, do the moderators get annoyed by us reporting bad posts or do they like it? I'm always a bit hesitant because I don't want to make them have to work even harder.


There's nothing quite like a clean forum. :D
We appreciate having bad posts reported. If we feel that it's not really that bad, we can ignore it but we can't always find what isn't reported and after scanning a few hundred (or thousand) posts, my eyes and brain feel very tired.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,388
42
1123.6536.5321
bousozoku said:
We appreciate having bad posts reported. If we feel that it's not really that bad, we can ignore it but we can't always find what isn't reported and after scanning a few hundred (or thousand) posts, my eyes and brain feel very tired.
Thanks for the confirmation on this bousozoku, I'll continue my efforts to assist you guys then, knowing that they are appreciated and not causing more harm than good. :)
 

barneygumble

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2005
726
0
~Shard~ said:
Yes, I hear ya mad jew. I make a point to report these types of posts all the time to the Mods, who are no doubt sick of reading my reports by now. :eek: ;)

The Mods are busy enough as they are, and cannot be everywhere, so I try and do my part and report these types of things as much as possible, just to keep the Forums clean.
You are more guilty of this than anyone on the boards
:p

Just kidding
 

devilot

Moderator emeritus
May 1, 2005
15,532
2
I'm sad... I know it bugs most people but I have done it a couple of times. Mainly because after I submit a reply (in a happenin' thread), I see another post I'd like to respond to quickly w/out having it dismissed and so I hit that reply button again. :eek:
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,388
42
1123.6536.5321
devilot said:
I'm sad... I know it bugs most people but I have done it a couple of times. Mainly because after I submit a reply (in a happenin' thread), I see another post I'd like to respond to quickly w/out having it dismissed and so I hit that reply button again. :eek:
No worries, that's happened to me lots as well. If both posts which I wanted to reply to would have been there initially, I would have replied to both in the same post, however when I hit submit, and see another post has been submitted while I was typing up my reply, I find it easier sometimes just to reply to that one as well.

It's just important to be conscious of it, to try and keep the Forums and clean as possible. :cool:
 

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,819
41
Andover, MA
Call me crazy (most do...), but I fail to see why this matters... granted, there's a trivial increase in bandwidth to provide formatting HTML for the additional post(s), but I don't see why having two, three, or ten sequential posts is a problem (with the exception of posts which literally are duplicates, and those can be deleted). We all have scroll bars, and I'd rather see several consecutive posts with a different point in each than one post trying to gather replies for several previous posts within it.

It takes less time, so posts are more timely.

Not that I see anything wrong with having multiple quotes in a single reply; I think it's often better that way. And I hate it when people quote a given (usually long) post in whole several times in a row to reply to different parts of it.

But, personally, I see nothing wrong with writing several short posts in a row or with replying to a given post with several posts, each of which quote a different part.

As far as editing a post to add to it, well, that's fine if it's very recent, but otherwise it's unlikely your additional text will be seen as people rarely re-read threads to see if edits have occurred.

I don't want to see useless spam any more than anyone else here does, but I think there's a difference between spam and a series of posts, as long as each one provides something additional as opposed to repeating the previous posts. There's no real resource drain, and it doesn't cause strife and hardship to hit the down arrow a couple of times to scroll that extra few lines.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,388
42
1123.6536.5321
jsw said:
Call me crazy (most do...), but I fail to see why this matters... granted, there's a trivial increase in bandwidth to provide formatting HTML for the additional post(s), but I don't see why having two, three, or ten sequential posts is a problem (with the exception of posts which literally are duplicates, and those can be deleted). We all have scroll bars, and I'd rather see several consecutive posts with a different point in each than one post trying to gather replies for several previous posts within it.

It takes less time, so posts are more timely.

Not that I see anything wrong with having multiple quotes in a single reply; I think it's often better that way. And I hate it when people quote a given (usually long) post in whole several times in a row to reply to different parts of it.

But, personally, I see nothing wrong with writing several short posts in a row or with replying to a given post with several posts, each of which quote a different part.

As far as editing a post to add to it, well, that's fine if it's very recent, but otherwise it's unlikely your additional text will be seen as people rarely re-read threads to see if edits have occurred.

I don't want to see useless spam any more than anyone else here does, but I think there's a difference between spam and a series of posts, as long as each one provides something additional as opposed to repeating the previous posts. There's no real resource drain, and it doesn't cause strife and hardship to hit the down arrow a couple of times to scroll that extra few lines.
I agree there definitely is a difference between spam and a series of meaningful responses, but I think that:

a) it is a trick used by some people wanting an avatar to increase their post count, which I don't think is right
b) it clutters up the thread. Not much, and yes, it is easily scrolled through, but nonetheless, it adds extra posts and lengthens the thread, arguably unnecessarily

For me it's just more a thing of keeping it neat and tidy - as you say, from a bandwidth/capacity perspective, this is a non-issue.

But, I agree, if someone has something meaningful to say, and will be typing a lot of text regardless, it probably won't save on space of they do it all in one, long post, or if they do it in a series of posts.

And there is something to be said for addressing completely different topics/questions, with separate posts. I have done this myself as well, (and will continue to), but am conscious of it.

So yeah, in the grand scheme of things, probably not a big deal, but something to keep in mind if nothing else. ;) :)
 

balamw

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 16, 2005
19,075
963
New England
I usually try to combine posts when there is a logical connection between them, even before ~Shard~ started this campaign, for example http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1886335#post1886335 but I think one recent case where two of my my posts were merged by a mod was non-ideal. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1886460#post1886460

Yes the posts were close to each other, but they did not have a topical connection, and so I did not combine them as the second one was a response to an question that was on a different topic.

Even though the question was off-topic I thought it deserved an answer since EAC is a wonderful tool on the windows side, and might be holding someone like joebells back from switching. Merging them has the unfortunate side effect of making the off-topic respnse to joebells less visible as a reply to his question. I also chose not to PM him as again, I thought the response to be a useful on for any Windows users on the fence w.r.t. this handy utility.

I'm all for merging posts that hang together, but let's not take this to the extreme shall we?

B
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
balamw said:
I usually try to combine posts when there is a logical connection between them, even before ~Shard~ started this campaign, for example http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1886335#post1886335 but I think one recent case where two of my my posts were merged by a mod was non-ideal. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1886460#post1886460

Yes the posts were close to each other, but they did not have a topical connection, and so I did not combine them as the second one was a response to an question that was on a different topic.

Even though the question was off-topic I thought it deserved an answer since EAC is a wonderful tool on the windows side, and might be holding someone like joebells back from switching. Merging them has the unfortunate side effect of making the off-topic respnse to joebells less visible as a reply to his question. I also chose not to PM him as again, I thought the response to be a useful on for any Windows users on the fence w.r.t. this handy utility.

I'm all for merging posts that hang together, but let's not take this to the extreme shall we?

B
Both of your responses are quite visible. There is nothing extreme about it.

On second thought, being that one of them was a response to something off-topic, I should have deleted it, instead of combining it with the the other reply.
 

EricNau

Moderator emeritus
Apr 27, 2005
10,589
31
San Francisco, CA
Can someone define what a "double post" is? (I always assumed it was someone who hit the "submit reply" button one too many times, and therefore posted two identical posts.)

So if we are responding to two different people, on two different subjects (in the same thread), are we supposed to make it one post with multiple quotes, and then write our response under each quote, or as two separate posts?
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
EricNau said:
Can someone define what a "double post" is? (I always assumed it was someone who hit the "submit reply" button one too many times, and therefore posted two identical posts.)

Yeah, I suppose that's really what a double post is but...


EricNau said:
So if we are responding to two different people, on two different subjects (in the same thread), are we supposed to make it one post with multiple quotes, and then write our response under each quote?

...IMO it looks a bit neater if you do just make the single post so long as it's clear who you're responding to. In other words, quote them both and reply your response under each quote. It'll mean your signature isn't clogging up your responses too. :)
 

Lacero

macrumors 604
Jan 20, 2005
6,639
2
I think double posting is fine as long as the topic is differentiated enough. Combining quotes is a good idea if the subject matter closely relates to one another and the train of thought similar.

I wouldn't want to see multiple quotes in a post where the subject matter varied greatly.
 

EricNau

Moderator emeritus
Apr 27, 2005
10,589
31
San Francisco, CA
mad jew said:
Yeah, I suppose that's really what a double post is but...
...IMO it looks a bit neater if you do just make the single post so long as it's clear who you're responding to. In other words, quote them both and reply your response under each quote. It'll mean your signature isn't clogging up your responses too. :)
Just in my opinion...
I find it easier to read/follow posts when they keep it to one quote per post. (unless the quotes are from the same user).
This way, you won't be mixing subjects in one post.

So I guess I'm guilty of doing this, I just find it not only easier to write (don't have to copy/paste), but I would think it would be easier to follow what's going on.

By the way - The way you cut my post into parts and responded to it - I agree with doing that, I just think it over complicates things if you are quoting two different people.

~Shard~ said:
Yes, I hear ya mad jew. I make a point to report these types of posts all the time to the Mods, who are no doubt sick of reading my reports by now. :eek: ;)

The Mods are busy enough as they are, and cannot be everywhere, so I try and do my part and report these types of things as much as possible, just to keep the Forums clean.
I think reporting people to the Mods, just because they had two posts in a row (responding to different quotes) seems a little harsh.

EDIT: I just did it! I feel stupid. I guess this is a bad habit. :eek:
---What I just did, is that what you are complaining about? - If so, sorry - Please don't report me.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,951
3
Gone but not forgotten.
Lacero said:
I think double posting is fine as long as the topic is differentiated enough. Combining quotes is a good idea if the subject matter closely relates to one another and the train of thought similar.

I wouldn't want to see multiple quotes in a post where the subject matter varied greatly.
If the subject matter varies greatly, one of those quotes is probably off-topic and shouldn't be there in the first place.