Start each thread with original message

[Irina]

Is it possible to start threads with the original message and add the replies under it? It would be much easier to read the whole thread, and save valuable internet time for travellers, who use the net in the public libraries and internet cafes. Now we have to scroll all the way down the page, and scroll up after reading each message....

[Jim]

I can easily switch the thread order around if people really want it that way. Right now, newest comments are on top (called reverse thread order) and it's been like that since the beginning of performers.net.

There are pros and cons to both ways...

With regular threading (newest comment on bottom) you can read the threads in order simply by scrolling down. However, if you're following a thread with lots of comments and keep returning to the thread, you need to scroll past many many comments you've already read to get to the latest comment. This is frustrating... especially if the thread is several pages long and the latest comment is something stupid.

With reverse threading (newest comment on top) reading a thread you've never read is more frustrating if you have to scroll to the end and read backwards, but it's much more convenient if you're following the progress of a thread. Then you'd just have to click on the thread and the latest couple comments are right at the top.

I'd put it to a vote and switch if lots of people want it changed. (I just have to flick a switch on a control panel to make it change, so it requires no work on my end.) Then if you all hate it, I can switch it back just as easy.

So why doesn't everyone just comment here and let me know what you want...

Reverse thread order (like it is now)
or
Regular thread order (new comments on bottom.)

Jim

[Richard]

Vote: Leave it as is.

[malkav powermann]

vote

Vote: Regular thread order

[jester]

vote: REverse thread order.

[newyorkstreetdean]

The first non-fixed election in 4 years

Vote: Reverse thread

[Frisbee]

as is

I vote to leave it as it is.

[Doctor Eric]

I like it the way it is, imagine the jokes thread in reversed order.

Then again, if you play 'em backwards, they're funny.

[worldwidese]

If you click on 'View posts since your last visit"
on the front page then there is no problem, whatever order the threads are in.
Personally I would like to see a Spell Checker added. Seems to me the old site had one. Some of the posts are really excruciating.

[jester]

No Spell Checker.

I don't want an automoron aiding and abeiting the grammar police. Let the pedantic bastards suffer.. it helps their hunger as artists.

[Chance]

I vote for leaving it like it is. But I was wondering if it's at all possible for the starter post to stay at the top, while the rest of the messages go in reverse order? Maybe in a shaded or highlighted area of some kind?

And I was also wondering about a spell checker.

[Jim]

Originally posted by Chance
I vote for leaving it like it is. But I was wondering if it's at all possible for the starter post to stay at the top, while the rest of the messages go in reverse order? Maybe in a shaded or highlighted area of some kind?

And I was also wondering about a spell checker.

I thought of that idea, too, but it's not possible with this system. It's one way or the other... thread order reversed or regular.

Also, there will not be a spell checker here in the near future. I read up on that feature and it seems the makers of this BB (www.vbulletin.com) are not going to include one anytime soon. It's cost prohibitive, heavy on server resources, and difficult to implement with so many languages they'd need to include.

I agree it's difficult to read some peoples' misspelled rantings, but do you think those people would bother using a spell checker anyway?

[GlassHarper]

Leave it as it is, please

Regular threading. (Shortly after I joined p.net I posted a request for reverse threading. The response was "no, just get used to it." Now I'm used to it and would hate to see it changed).

It seems to me I once saw a "reverse thread" option here, but I sure can't find it now.

I, too, would love to see a spell checker. If I have a long post in mind I write it in MS Word, check it, save it as a ".txt" file and paste it to the "reply" box.

By the way, anyone who can spell "excruciating" doesn't need a spell checker!

[jester]

Originally posted by Jim
I agree it's difficult to read some peoples' misspelled rantings, but do you think those people would bother using a spell checker anyway?

I Bluddy wall woodent

[Magrat2005]

me want!! i vote reversing the treads so it starts with the original message, so much easier to read that way!!