Auto merge duplicates doing more harm than good

[Gio~Logist]

why not just make is so that it shows as a new post but doesnt bumb the thread? instead it just has a (new posts) in red, next to the thread name.

[tamarian]

Originally Posted by Brad

While I agree, on the other hand it allows the mods to spend more time watching over the community and less time removing and warning people for bumping. Just having a 'no bump' rule doesn't work, lets be honest how often does someone check the rules page anyway?

It's a lot easier to just place them in the ignore list.

Alternatively, anyone that violates the no bump rule could be placed in a new usergroup, and only that usergroup is to be subjected to this auto-merge punishment. This way you don't need to warn them or remove them

I do like the idea of a filter to check for common 'bump' posts, but keep in mind this won't catch everything and people that really want to bump will eventally figure out how to get around it.

True. But this is already doable. If someone wants to circumvent the auto-merge to bump threads, it's easy to do so right now.

Email notification can be improved (al la 'a reply was posted but was merged with a pior post due to auto bumping' in the email).

As I always rely on email notifications, this would solve 50% of the problem for me. But may not solve it for those who rely on "new posts". So I may not miss their post, but they would miss mine, which is the other 50%.

[Erwin]

Just letting members know that staff will be discussing this issue. Keep those suggestions coming. The more feedback from more members (not just a few), the better we can get an idea of what the members feel about this.

How about something like an update button, once a post is merged together an update button appears. Once clicked, it tells all subscribers to that thread that a significant update has occured. This will work great because only important threads are subscribed too, so the system can't be abused. And if someone does abuse the system in an important thread they can be placed in a usergroup that can't use the update button.

[Boofo]

I don't mean to be on the outside in this one, but is this a hack or part of vb now? I guess I've been away a little longer than I thought.

Both.

[Boofo]

Ok, how so and where are the settings?

[darnoldy]

Originally Posted by Erwin

The more feedback from more members (not just a few), the better we can get an idea of what the members feel about this.

I admit that I do not have the taboo against double posting that some here have--I come from communities where threading has been the standard for 20 years.

If the principal reason for automerging is to stem a tide of thread bumping, and that behavior occurs principally in the request forum(s) --as I understand the situation--then limit the automerging to that (those) forums.

my 2?-worth, anyway

--don

Oops, I thought you said "or a part of vb.org". Which is a stupid assumption being that this is the Site Feedback Forum.

/me needs more coffee.

[Wayne Luke]

Originally Posted by Wayne Luke

Intelligent filtering.

I will go on record as saying I don't like the feature as it is implemented and it can be improved. It creates detrimental effects on the purpose of running a discussion board which is discussion.

Simple merging based on time is wrong and disrupts conversations and their flow. To much of this and they become meaningless. In my opinion, anything that uses technology to limit human interaction is wrong and shouldn't be done. The whole point of a site like this is human interaction.

Let me clarify... I can see the usefulness of the Automerge for the purpose it was designed for. However, I think it can be smarter so that only certain things are merged to prevent bumping.