Often times my browser will not always allow me to open the larger Mudcat threads (over 100 posts is difficult). Could we all please get (back) into the habit of starting "Part 2" or whatever of a thread that goes over 100? I am sure I am not the only Mudcatter with this problem.

Thanks!

P

~Susan

One problem is that where a long thread still has useful things in it, starting a part two can break the continuity. That's why it's important, when starting apart two to put a link to the new thread in the old one, and a link to the old one in the new one.

Even so there is a problem of continuity breaking. It'd be great if there was some way of breaking a thread so that say the last 20 posts would be carried over into the new one. It is possible to do this manually by putting a bunch of posts from the old thread in the new one's opening post, and it is sometimes done, but it is I imagine very laborious. Also it's clumsy, because you don't get the posts included in the index at the start of the thread.

An example of a long thread where interesting new points can arise even at the end of a long and old thread, see the one on Raglan Road, where it has just been pointed out that lots of us have been singing a crucial line wrong all these years. ("An autumn day" probably should be "an August day" - in case at 122 it's to long to load.)

Let me try by copy and paste.

Subject: LONG threads:a request From: Peg Date: 03-Feb-02 - 09:53 AM

Hello friends;

Often times my browser will not always allow me to open the larger Mudcat threads (over 100 posts is difficult). Could we all please get (back) into the habit of starting "Part 2" or whatever of a thread that goes over 100? I am sure I am not the only Mudcatter with this problem.

Thanks!

P

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: LONG threads:a request From: WYSIWYG Date: 03-Feb-02 - 11:17 AM

I think people were reluctant to start Part II's on some of the recent threads because of the nature of the threads-- not having the heart to make it easy for them to continue, hoping they'd poop out, etc.

~Susan

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: LONG threads:a request From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03-Feb-02 - 12:41 PM

A good idea, and the handy thing with the Mudcat is the ability for us to do that kind of thing ourselves.

One problem is that where a long thread still has useful things in it, starting a part two can break the continuity. That's why it's important, when starting apart two to put a link to the new thread in the old one, and a link to the old one in the new one.

Even so there is a problem of continuity breaking. It'd be great if there was some way of breaking a thread so that say the last 20 posts would be carried over into the new one. It is possible to do this manually by putting a bunch of posts from the old thread in the new one's opening post, and it is sometimes done, but it is I imagine very laborious. Also it's clumsy, because you don't get the posts included in the index at the start of the thread.

An example of a long thread where interesting new points can arise even at the end of a long and old thread, see the one on Raglan Road, where it has just been pointed out that lots of us have been singing a crucial line wrong all these years. ("An autumn day" probably should be "an August day" - in case at 122 it's to long to load.)

Are they still taking ideas for the 'new' mudcat?

A good idea, and the handy thing with the Mudcat is the ability for us to do that kind of thing ourselves.

One problem is that where a long thread still has useful things in it, starting a part two can break the continuity. That's why it's important, when starting apart two to put a link to the new thread in the old one, and a link to the old one in the new one.

Even so there is a problem of continuity breaking. It'd be great if there was some way of breaking a thread so that say the last 20 posts would be carried over into the new one. It is possible to do this manually by putting a bunch of posts from the old thread in the new one's opening post, and it is sometimes done, but it is I imagine very laborious. Also it's clumsy, because you don't get the posts included in the index at the start of the thread.

An example of a long thread where interesting new points can arise even at the end of a long and old thread, see the one on Raglan Road, where it has just been pointed out that lots of us have been singing a crucial line wrong all these years. ("An autumn day" probably should be "an August day" - in case at 122 it's to long to load.)"

But I think that it probably is a good idea to do that kind of thing when a thread deserves to be carried on in a way that isn't excluding people who can't load long ones. Typically what happens when a thread is renewed is that the points which were made in the last few posts get overlooked, since there are people who won't have seen them because of the loading problem.

The convention seems to be that the thread renewal point is when it gets over 100. I think it probably should be a bit lower, at a level where everybody can still open up the link to the previous thread without a problem. Maybe around 80?

2 words... braodband! LOL!!

No, seriously, it'll help a lot if before you visit mudcat, you configure your browser to not load images... that includes backgrounds and such... takes us back to the early text-only days of cyberspace, but it will help pages to load faster, and hopefully load at all where they currently won't...

Best of luck eh!

This is more of a self-policing, self-regulating common courtesy sort of thing.

Not everyone has the most state of the art computer or access to connections and we need to be aware of this.

Those who don't want to mess with changing the default, don't have to.

Keep it brief, and link rather than paste when it isn't lyrics.

WassaiL! V

I've got broadband, but with a relatively slow (64k) cable modem, and the long tghreads can take a fair old time.

I did that thing with the Raglan Road thread I was mentioning - started a part two, with links back and forth, and included the 20 posts or so in my initial post. Wouldn't you know, it's sinking away down the page with just my solitary post. Still I'm hoping the next tiome someone wants to talk about Raglan Road, maybe they'll do it via the part 2. Explorations can get further when they incorporate something from previous explorations.