TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Trope Repair Shop, The 400 Post Limit and Dead Threads

Go To

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#101: Mar 20th 2012 at 11:07:07 AM

It is likely lower than that. The idea is to find the X threads that get the most posting activity so that we can find the cutoff for a lower thread cap.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Martello Hammer of the Pervs from Black River, NY Since: Jan, 2001
Hammer of the Pervs
#102: Mar 21st 2012 at 12:51:24 PM

I think lowering the cap is a good idea. As annoying as it is when I think there's a page that needs attention now oh my god and I can't make a TRS thread for it, this way it would be easier to figure out what needs to be resolved to get the stale threads locked. As it is now, you have to sort through so many different threads to figure out which ones you'd be interested in enough to help resolve. Fewer threads in general would make it easier to concentrate on the smaller number of stale threads.

"Did anybody invent this stuff on purpose?" - Phillip Marlowe on tequila, Finger Man by Raymond Chandler.
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#103: Mar 21st 2012 at 12:57:45 PM

I think we have to find out the number X of threads that get the most activity. We don't need TRS to be cluttered up with a lot of stale threads that don't help the wiki anyhow, but we shouldn't pick a random number to set the limit with.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
ArcadesSabboth from Mother Earth Since: Oct, 2011
#104: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:04:29 AM

A lower random number is better than leaving it the way it is. No thread can keep anybody's attention because they're constantly swamped by new threads.

And this massive cut made it worse. Now instead of 120 stale threads at the bottom, we have 20+ new threads at the top, and everything that was active is falling off the page. Add in 100 more over the next couple days, and most of what was being worked on last week will become stale and end up cut.

This is a horrible way to run the TRS. It almost prevents anything from being finished or accomplished.

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Osmium from Germany Since: Dec, 2010
#105: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:52:42 AM

We need a lower cap, before tons of new threads fill TRS to the 500 mark again. I think it is time for a 350 cap. This is below the current number of open threads, so some clean up of old threads is necessary and can be done without new threads distracting from the work which has to be done.

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#106: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:53:44 AM

I agree with a lower thread cap. At least 400. If nothing else our recent purge has taught us the last 100 threads aren't doing anything.

edited 22nd Mar '12 8:53:56 AM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#107: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:56:33 AM

By the way, is bumping and simultaneously requesting clocks on stale threads acceptable, if you don't bump too many things at once?

About lowering the cap; I think we need to find out which number X of threads get the most attention and drop the cap to that.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
ArcadesSabboth from Mother Earth Since: Oct, 2011
#108: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:57:51 AM

[up]We'll have time to do that after the limit is dropped to 350. Better to do that first, before the entire 1st page consists of 120 new threads and everything that was active gets thrown to the bottom or right off the page.

If we let that happen the TRS will be worse off than it was before the giant robo-cut.

edited 22nd Mar '12 8:58:36 AM by ArcadesSabboth

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#109: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:59:42 AM

I'd rather we lower the cap systematically instead of drastically. Currently, we have 398 threads, so let's drop the cap to 400 and see how it goes.

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#110: Mar 22nd 2012 at 8:59:46 AM

It's a good idea not to bump more than five threads a day just to bump them. Mass bumpings just kill conversation.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
ArcadesSabboth from Mother Earth Since: Oct, 2011
#111: Mar 22nd 2012 at 9:07:50 AM

So lower it to 400, then wait a while, then lower it further.

Just please, please Fast Eddie, lower it. Don't let the first page become 90% new threads. That's the equivalent of bumping 120 dead threads simultaneously. It kills everything that used to be active.

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#112: Mar 22nd 2012 at 9:12:06 AM

Yes, let's drop the cap here, please. We can debate @103 later.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Osmium from Germany Since: Dec, 2010
#113: Mar 22nd 2012 at 9:39:19 AM

Lowering the cap to a number higher than the amount of open threads will result in nothing. Increasing it to a number lower than the current amount of open threads will result in some pressue to actually go and hunt down the old forgotten threads.

Right now we have about 20 threads marked pending final action, about 30 threads are older than one year, more than I am willing to count are older than 100 days. And this is after we cut such an high amount of "dead" threads.

Spark9 Since: Nov, 2010
#114: Mar 22nd 2012 at 9:43:34 AM

Also, we should probably start hollering to get several of those 120 killed threads restored. Most of them still indicate a problem that needs resolving. Several of them were in the middle of wrapping up, or in the middle of a crowner.

lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#115: Mar 22nd 2012 at 9:46:34 AM

If no one is interested in working on those, then reopening them won't do much good. Most of them simply fell off the radar due to the lack of interest.

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#116: Mar 22nd 2012 at 9:47:49 AM

Let's first work out some strategy to deal with backlogs before we reopen closed threads. I think there are several reasons for backlogging, but I'm not sure where to discuss that.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Spark9 Since: Nov, 2010
#117: Mar 22nd 2012 at 10:00:38 AM

[up][up] I don't think that's true. I think they fell off the radar due to there being too many posts in the TRS to keep track of.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#118: Mar 22nd 2012 at 10:01:38 AM

[up]That is one possible reason for backlogging. Any more?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#119: Mar 22nd 2012 at 10:11:33 AM

[up][up] No, not necessarily. That does happen, but many threads just fall off because no one cares. The threads on Squick, What The Hell Hero, DoubleStandard and Sailor Fuku although not locked by the bot, were only locked after they had remained stale for a really long time, and no one had bothered to holler for them or invest some time there. And there had been no decisions or crowners in those threads, just propositions about them, but put simply, there was not enough interest.

edited 22nd Mar '12 10:12:17 AM by lu127

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#120: Mar 22nd 2012 at 10:18:28 AM

[up]In that context, it would be an idea of autolocking something that isn't crownered or Pending Final Action after Y days are over.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
ArcadesSabboth from Mother Earth Since: Oct, 2011
#121: Mar 22nd 2012 at 10:30:55 AM

But part of the reason people don't care is because there are too many problems and too few people who care about working on problems. Or too few people who are willing to post to say that they think X isn't enough of a problem for the TRS, so the thread just gets no replies instead.

edited 22nd Mar '12 10:31:24 AM by ArcadesSabboth

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Spark9 Since: Nov, 2010
#122: Mar 22nd 2012 at 11:18:20 AM

We should really compile a list of the 120 locked threads and find out how many of them were (1) things that nobody cared about, (2) a stalled discussion in need of a crowner, (3) a stable crowner that needed calling, or (4) a clear decision that still needed implementing.

Catbert Since: Jan, 2012
#123: Mar 22nd 2012 at 11:28:13 AM

I agree with implementing a 400 thread cap.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#124: Mar 22nd 2012 at 11:50:14 AM

[up][up]We need a list of these threads.

Also, I think that the why is important here.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#125: Mar 22nd 2012 at 11:52:26 AM

Yes, but first we need a link to the page of the morgue in which they ended up. I still can't find them! sad

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer

Total posts: 186
Top