Twin threads

[Senna Jawa]

I propose to introduce twin threads, watched by moderators, so that they will perform as intended. Their titles would look like

"XYZ" and "XYZ--comments"​

(or "XYZ--discussion"). Only the initiator of the double thread would contribute to the "XYZ" part, while everybody (including the initiator) would be welcome to post in the "XYZ-comments" subthread.

If the institution of double threads is introduced then I might be tempted to start two of them, complementary one to another: "Poetry as art" and "Poetry--the art of words". The first one would be more strategic. So much so that it would even have implications about the authors' personality. The latter one would me rather technical (the first one would be plenty technical too, though).

(Frankly, I don't have a good title for the first one. Simple "Poetry" would be the best objectively but...).

I've mentioned (buried) this idea in another thread but it was perhaps overlooked by everybody. In particular I have suggested that the two parts of the twin thread wouid be always listed one next to the other in the listing.

Regards,

 

[wildsweetone]

i'm not sure i quite understand what you're suggesting SJ.

are you going to be writing 'essays' in the 'Poetry as Art' thread and then we get to comment and discuss your point of view?

please explain just a little more.

thanks

 

[Senna Jawa]

please explain just a little more.

Let's say that you want to write on the topic "Flowers in poetry". You feel like writing in installments, perhaps about 4 parts, perhaps one per 3-12 days. On one hand you may like the interaction but on the other hand it takes something away from the whole thing when you get your sequence marred by remarks like: "Now I see why you have a flower in your av. BTW it looks very sexy to me." Or "Who said that flowers are important?" And then "You have never justified the importance of the flowers in poetry. That figures. It's so typical.", etc.

Even sensible comments do break the continuity of an exposition, essay, analysis or whatever. However, they are GREAT when in the neighboring, twin thread.

In order to have it both ways I have introduced here on Literotica twin threads, but informally, and they didn't work. Participants were not alert enough or didn't care to stay away from the author's subthread. But thanks to the moderators-institution the twin threads can be enforced. Thus you may have your continuity in your author's subthread "Flowers in poetry", while all serious and not so serious comments, together with your responses, would end up in the "Flowers in poetry--discussion" twin thread. You will feel that you are writing for an audience while your line of narration would not be interrupted or hopelessly broken.

(The author's-narration thread may have a symbol attached to it's title in the listing, so that people will easily see and understand that it is a "read only" thread).

Best regards,

 

[wildsweetone]

it sounds interesting.

how different is that to submitting an essay/analysis on Lit and then openly discussing it here?

okay i see the two threads side by side would be better. the mods might even have the ability to 'close' the analysis thread between postings. i know this is possible on some other websites.

the only hassle i foresee is wading through the waffling comments in order to keep up with the 'discussion' of the analysis.

it sounds like a neat idea.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

If you want, we can close a thread immediately after you post, so that there won't be any comments.

We can't do anything about keeping two threads together, though, because the order in which they appear is a strictly function of your personal settings. The default is threads with the latest posts appearing first, but they can also be ordered by title, author's name, first post, etc.

 

[wildsweetone]

or, how about stickying the analysis/essay thread and leaving the comments thread to float?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

or, how about stickying the analysis/essay thread and leaving the comments thread to float?

That's good in theory, but how many threads can we stick before they start clogging the forum's functioning?

It wouldn't be difficult to add links at the start of each of the threads referencing the other, though. That should be enough to keep them together, in a way.

 

[wildsweetone]

we've got a way to go to catch up to the Author's Hangout six! stickies...

links is good, as is a twin symbol for both threads. (whispering - perhaps both threads could reside in the PDC - they will be discussing poetry, and it would keep traffic flowing through there.)



off to workies. have fun

 

[WickedEve]

That's good in theory, but how many threads can we stick before they start clogging the forum's functioning?

It wouldn't be difficult to add links at the start of each of the threads referencing the other, though. That should be enough to keep them together, in a way.

Personally, I like to keep approximately 3 stickies on a regular basis and then add more special threads, like contests, for a limited amount of time. No one asked, but I have strong opinions on sticky issues.

 

[Rybka]

Personally, I like to keep approximately 3 stickies on a regular basis and then add more special threads, like contests, for a limited amount of time. No one asked, but I have strong opinions on sticky issues.

I do too! - It depends on your internet viewing/monitor selections, but I have always felt that if you have more than four "stickies" you have compromised/reduced the viewing area for new posts too much. I hate to scroll as soon as I get to a webpage.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Yeah, the less stickies the better, I think.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

(whispering - perhaps both threads could reside in the PDC - they will be discussing poetry, and it would keep traffic flowing through there.)

Yes, but it's not exactly what the sub-forum was created for, and if we start putting all the meaningful poetry discussions there, we will be emptying out the main Poetry Feedback & Discussion forum of both its Poetry and its Discussion components.