PDA

View Full Version : Dupes on this forum


MP301
04-28-2009, 12:44 PM
I was recently reading a post that I found very interesting and would have liked to post my input on it, but it was locked because of the stupid "its a Dupe" posts.

Is it really necessary to cry dupe every time someone posts something that may have been posted before? I mean, its understandable if there is another current or recent thread that is a dupe, but who cares if someone is reposting something from 6 months ago or longer that a lot of us have yet not seen? Should we always have to start every post with " hope its not a dupe yada yada yada!?!?

I would think that it would take less effort to to just move on and go read something else then taking the time to write DUPE! Its not a Dupe for some people, because even though people like me try to get on here every day, many do not.

And even if somethings a dupe, if someone who has not seen it now comments or adds information, thats a good thing, right?

Those of us that have not seen something do not care whetehr or not you have seen it. If im reading something that I have not read before, its not a dupe to me!


This should be a sticky!




:dupe::xeno: :dupe: :xeno: :dupe: :xeno:

evan69
04-28-2009, 1:09 PM
I agree, especially since the search feature is pretty bad sometimes. I have seen many things that I haven't seen before, and found out that they were a 7th time dupe. If it's been a long time, leave it alone, nobody cares.

gcvt
04-28-2009, 1:21 PM
This thread is a :dupe::dupe: !!!











J/K ;)

There should be a rule that if you say "Dupe" or use ":dupe:", you should have to provide a link(s) to the other thread(s). If it's a dupe and it's a subject someone would like to read more about, they should at least be pointed in the right direction. Just saying "dupe" serves no purpose.

Librarian
04-28-2009, 1:28 PM
I'll admit to sympathy, somewhat.

This is a pretty active forum; I looked something up yesterday that was less than a month old, and it was 481 threads down, really buried. It's pretty hard for even someone diligently looking to go that far.

And I'll agree the search function doesn't always bring up the prior posts on a subject (there's a fascinating body of theoretical discussion on searching, 'relevance' and 'recall' - fascinating, I guess if you're a Librarian :) ).

One of the problems is thread titles; we can get to folks AFTER they post to say "Y'know, if you include the bill number as part of the thread title, all the threads about that bill will kind of group for folks; "2009 HR 45 Blair Holt" is much easier to connect with other things than "OMG They Want To Register Everything" '.

But that's tough to do with new members.

And though we try to put up stickies for people to see and read first, that just doesn't happen for everyone. (I wonder how much it helps - sometimes it seems to work pretty well.)

I think the 'dupe' reply is useful to collect the posters in a smaller number of places; if we're trying to actually do something - support or oppose a bill, for example - we need to concentrate our efforts. I think a 'soft' answer is more likely to bring newer folks into 'the way we do things' than a harsh one would be, so most of mine try for that tone.

Think also about those of us who have seen the same thing dozens of times.... :eek:

rkt88edmo
04-28-2009, 1:42 PM
if the dupe police always provide a link then you would be able to link through pretty easily

KWA-S
04-28-2009, 1:43 PM
I think that instead of locking a dupe, the two threads should be merged...that way we have fewer threads, and the comments from all dupe threads can be viewed by anyone interested. It would also help in search because you wouldn't have to sort through the dupe threads to find what you're looking for.

Stickies really only work if there isn't too many of them. If theres 8 or 9 stickies, someone is less likely to read them than if there were 2 or 3, even if they were 3-4 times longer. If we could minimize all non active stickies (less than 1 post per 3 days) to one "read this before posting" thread (and maybe a "Donation thread"), that would be a lot of help getting a newcomer on track.

But a lot of it depends on the posters themselves...you cant FORCE everyone to include the bill number in their title, or use the search button (dupe helps though) or read the forum for a while before posting (I lurked for 2 months before i registered). I was going to recommend creating a subsection for "Media Related," for all the discussion about media and posting of 2A relevant news articles, which after the shootings earlier, flooded the main forum....but then I realized most of those posters wouldn't post in the right area; note the "Current legal cases" section.

jasilva
04-28-2009, 1:48 PM
I'll admit to sympathy, somewhat.

This is a pretty active forum; I looked something up yesterday that was less than a month old, and it was 481 threads down, really buried. It's pretty hard for even someone diligently looking to go that far.

And I'll agree the search function doesn't always bring up the prior posts on a subject (there's a fascinating body of theoretical discussion on searching, 'relevance' and 'recall' - fascinating, I guess if you're a Librarian :) ).

One of the problems is thread titles; we can get to folks AFTER they post to say "Y'know, if you include the bill number as part of the thread title, all the threads about that bill will kind of group for folks; "2009 HR 45 Blair Holt" is much easier to connect with other things than "OMG They Want To Register Everything" '.

But that's tough to do with new members.

And though we try to put up stickies for people to see and read first, that just doesn't happen for everyone. (I wonder how much it helps - sometimes it seems to work pretty well.)

I think the 'dupe' reply is useful to collect the posters in a smaller number of places; if we're trying to actually do something - support or oppose a bill, for example - we need to concentrate our efforts. I think a 'soft' answer is more likely to bring newer folks into 'the way we do things' than a harsh one would be, so most of mine try for that tone.

Think also about those of us who have seen the same thing dozens of times.... :eek:

This all makes sense, unfortunately it's become part of the culture here that your special if you get to call "dupe".

Technical Ted
04-28-2009, 1:52 PM
I thought this was a thread about people who pay more than the MSRP or fair value for items in the FS forums.

Cypren
04-28-2009, 1:58 PM
Think also about those of us who have seen the same thing dozens of times.... :eek:

What?! BUT I NEED TO WARN YOU ABOUT HR 45!!! :innocent:

Librarian
04-28-2009, 2:47 PM
I thought this was a thread about people who pay more than the MSRP or fair value for items in the FS forums.

Or those who donate money to the Bradys.

N6ATF
04-28-2009, 2:51 PM
This all makes sense, unfortunately it's become part of the culture here that your special if you get to call "dupe".

-1
I didn't realize MEMORY was a special ability.

I think that instead of locking a dupe, the two threads should be merged...that way we have fewer threads, and the comments from all dupe threads can be viewed by anyone interested. It would also help in search because you wouldn't have to sort through the dupe threads to find what you're looking for.
+1

if the dupe police always provide a link then you would be able to link through pretty easily

+1

jasilva
04-28-2009, 3:45 PM
-1
I didn't realize MEMORY was a special ability.


+1



+1

Who said I meant special "ability" Ed?:43:

N6ATF
04-28-2009, 4:35 PM
Exactly, it's not special at all for most humans to remember things. Thanks for clearing that up.

Vtec44
04-28-2009, 4:43 PM
Yes, the search function on here is pretty bad! :D

MP301
04-29-2009, 2:51 AM
Great responses...I like the merge idea... I really dont want to miss anything

jasilva
04-29-2009, 10:09 PM
Who said I meant special "ability" Ed?:43:

Exactly, it's not special at all for most humans to remember things. Thanks for clearing that up.


Read it again and ponder it for a minute, you'll get it Ed. :rolleyes:

MudCamper
04-29-2009, 10:38 PM
The search function here truly does suck. And the reason is simple. All of the search terms are ored instead of anded, so the more specific you try to get, the more irrelevant results you get. It needs to be fixed. The search terms need to be anded.

KCM222
04-30-2009, 11:44 AM
I can testify to the fact that, as a new member, plenty of "dupes" have been educational for me.

That being said, please check out this really important USA Today poll:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm

KWA-S
04-30-2009, 1:02 PM
I can testify to the fact that, as a new member, plenty of "dupes" have been educational for me.

That being said, please check out this really important USA Today poll:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm

Hahahaha...ha, oh wow.:beatdeadhorse5:
Welcome to the forum!