We reorganise and categorise posts on a daily basis to keep discussion relevant and to put conversations in their right place (kudos @Bort for his latest project on reorganising TV History). Threads that just contain links are a problem, I’m sorry you don’t see it that way. As I said, it’s not really anyone’s fault, it just ends up this way, which is why I’m formulating a solution to stop threads just being indexes for other sites so no one loses out.
2 Likes
If the thread only has links and no discussion then the thread basically would fall away. At least the 7mate thread is re generated each week for discussion if people want to
Threads that contain links… which threads are those? Which sites are doing that?
Anyway…
Someone just asked a question about Car Crash TV - people will respond if they want to
It’s not like we want to cull content. We just want to reorganise it so we don’t end up with spammy threads. It’s really very simple. With respect, your position of always being against any decision about this doesn’t help. Let’s meet half way. We’ll make a Schedule Releases thread just for links to your blog every 7 days so people know where to reference, and then if you like you can post the preceding paragraph you place before your links in the discussion thread? Problem solvered! 
2 Likes
I get what you are saying. For there to be an issue there has to be an issue. Aside from my ONCE a week add of schedule information to threads titled schedules that have no schedules in them, can you please let me know what threads are “spammy”. I cannot find an example of threads that are spammy - they all contain discussion. Can you give me 2 or 3 examples is all I am asking?
The 7TWO and 7flix threads are a good start, but really most of the channel specific schedule threads have at some point been just blog links with no one talking. Again, this is what we want to avoid. Which is why I propose that we have a dedicated thread for actual schedule releases which can act as a reference to whatever blog is releasing structured schedule information, and the discussion can happen in the channel specific threads. This way, as I’ve said several times, we can avoid threads inadvertently turning into link indexes for one particular author.
1 Like
Insiders thread is another one. Just twitter pics and emails.
So we have a couple of multi channels, that I happen to post and also Insiders? That’s it?
I can never find out when Campmeeting is on WIN Gold as they don’t have an EPG. Any chance you could do a 24 hour guide for WIN Gold?
1 Like
You said 2 to 3 examples is “all you were asking for”. I was hoping that providing 2 examples of the exact thing I’ve been talking about would get us to some kind of common ground?
No I meant a few examples that do not involve me
Rules seem to change when it involves me, but then its said its not about me. So then I adapt to rules, then I do something within rules and the rules change again.
So aside from a couple of multi channels that I personally post I was asking for examples of this issue
So far we have 1 thread - Insiders
Oh, I wasn’t aware you were setting me up for that. Ok, so we don’t have many people that post links to their blog across multiple threads every 7 days inadvertently shifting threads to just having links to their blog. If someone like David Knox did this for every article he wrote, we would be having the same discussion with him. If a member who doesn’t have a blog did the same thing on behalf of another site, posting a specific thing every X days, we would be having the same discussion with them also.
I’m not sure how I can be more amicable about this. Yes, your posts are what’s in question. You’ve made it clear you don’t intend to spam and that your posts aren’t about clicks or exposure. I respect that and appreciate that. However, there’s no way to address the issue other than talking to you about it and proposing an idea where we can meet half way. If this wasn’t about clicks or exposure and all about serving the wider media community then surely you’re cool with us just splitting the links from the discussion?
1 Like
What’s the difference between Aaron doing this weekly when TVCynic does it too?
what difference does it make? This isn’t the Spanish Inquisition. But to answer your question, there are plenty of examples that are fairly easy to find - one I found this afternoon was the thread about Les Norton that was a series of posts that are either links or PR guff (posted by multiple people, but that doesn’t matter) with what I can see to be one item of actual discussion about the topic
If the posted content isn’t generating discussion, we need to look at why that is - in a lot of cases its simply because people aren’t interested in discussing the topic at hand, and that’s ok, but it may mean that the topics where this occur don’t need individual threads.
I’m keen for the site to start to evolve into new ways of discussing content and to change some of the rigidity that we’ve previously had - the change in the TV History section is a good example of this. We don’t have any fixed way to achieve this, nor any definite plans - to use a tech buzzword, it will be agile in order to react to where the site goes
1 Like
Well said Bacco!
I think what you said is right.
I only thing is that I asked about me because you and I have these conversations in private chat. I keep getting told it is not about me - it is a rule - I give you examples and you dismiss them
Here is another example.
There are times when people want to know information but may not want to comment. Having weekly schedules posted by Tv Cynic are useful and helpful to people - unless there is some returning shows or something people have read before there is very little discussion but I am sure the members appreciate.
7mate, 7two, 10 Bold, etc is called Programs and Schedules and Tv Cynic does not post those so I do that to generate interest and create chat… if people want to.
I am not going to respond to this again at the moment as I can see where it is going. I knew this was coming. I predicted it. You have rules, you change them because of me, you say its not because of me. Everything is fine. I make ONE weekly post in about 10 threads to update members and maybe start discussion, everything is fine and then someone starts…
Anyway I have nothing else to say otherwise I am going to get the blame for this one too.
It’s a catch 22. We don’t want threads to inadvertently turn into RSS feeds, at the same time we don’t want to stop discussion. Really, you shouldn’t have any issue with us adjusting the way these scheduled releases of information are handled. It’s not about the clicks or exposure as you said, so what is the big deal really? Let’s just try it out - let’s say a dedicated thread for all future schedule releases. Then discussion about individual schedules can happen in the channel threads. The paragraph you write before the link is perfect, it’s exactly what we encourage to avoid the systematic feed-like outcome we have now.
It’s a totally reasonable response to the issue and honestly I don’t think any more about it needs to be discussed.
3 Likes
And the evidence suggests that in some of those threads, they don’t want to - that’s not your fault, it’s quite possibly a reflection of the content of the channel
This isn’t about you - it’s something that we’ve monitored for some time though. As @WAtvVideos stated, you’ll still be able to post, it will be in a centralised location - if things change and the guides promote greater discussion, we’ll revisit again
Is anyone else seeing something a little weird going on with the reply notifications lately?
Just in the last few days, when I’ve been getting notifications that someone has posted a reply to one of my posts, I go and view it, I find it’s actually a reply to another member … often it’s for @ElCapitanCranky
That could have something to do with a relatively new feature where a quote is automatically removed from a reply if the full post is quoted and it’s directly below the quoted post. The system lets the quote happen, probably triggering a notification, then removes the quote a short time after. It seems to match up with your experience anyway.