TSa skribis 2005-09-27 10:15 (+0200): > Is a long running thread considered a bad thing on this list?
Just like how a post being Warnocked can have one or more of several causes, a long running thread can. Some are bad, some are good. As a thread becomes longer and more fanned out, it becomes hard to manage, and everyone has their favourite subthreads. This results in uninformed discussion, divergence and it getting even harder to reach concencus. > I have grasped so far, that spawning a new thread after > some divergence from the original topic is considered nice. Whenever you want to react on several posts simultaneously, consider it as a whole, and say what you have to say about it, usually with a new proposal, I do think it is better to start an entirely new thread. It can make a subject more accessible for outsiders, who have neither the time nor the will to read the original 50-message discussion. If this is the goal, the new thread should start off with a well structured explanation, instead of just referring to previous discussion. There are many huge differences between repying and starting a new thread, but still it can be hard to decide what to do. For me, the most noticeable difference is the time spent thinking and writing: for replies it's short, for new messages, it's long. Juerd -- http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html