BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't like it, let say you read a thread "X" and then try to find him again and don't find him since he is called "Y" now. For me it would complicate forum navigation a lot, when thread owner change more then correcting their grammar.

The implementation should be quite easy, since GM and mod already can do it, but we do it just in very rare cases.

In case I am correct, the supporters have a bookmarking option for bookmarking a thread.
You can add to that an option for them to name the bookmark with their name, and resolve this issue.

Yes, for those whe are not supporters it will cost more time to find the thread they are looking for.
BUT, this is not relevant or top priority - as the bookmarking issue (opened only for supporters) proves so.

In addition currently a user can delete or edit his messages.
Your argument could also be given about that.
This also proves that this feature is something that the BB developers may find worth the effort for users to then look for it.

How much does this feature is going to be used?
Not to nuch, and by that it is even less crucial for the case you brang.

So, if this feature is not going to be used frequent then why adding it?
Because it will still be used and it will assist where its coding's cost is very-low.

Is it a "top-priority" feature?
No. Not even close to that.
But, this folder is for all suggestions level.
Especially that this suggestion does not cost much, which mean that it may be decided to be added before a more critical feature that will take much longer.

In case I am correct, the supporters have a bookmarking option for bookmarking a thread.

No, they don't. As I explained before it is a feature that has been suggested many times but has not been implemented.

In addition currently a user can delete or edit his messages.
Your argument could also be given about that.

maybe that looses information, but i know i found what i searched, and don't continue to read all threads. Which could be a lot of work, in crowded forum, especially for least forum active users.

But it is harder to disrupt a whole conversation through editing, and less likely then just changing a thread title(who are often used stupid, like Help in help forum that quite a classic)

And even when bookmarks get implemented, i would use it more for importance peace of information like BB post, then for common forum chat which i mostly search and when you are off some days it is already not so easy to find a thread in the help section cause it is so active.

Is it a "top-priority" feature?
No. Not even close to that.
But, this folder is for all suggestions level.

does mean no top priority, that you couldn't add pro and cons?

does mean no top priority, that you couldn't add pro and cons?

I didn't understood what you've meant.

In addition currently a user can delete or edit his messages.
Your argument could also be given about that.

maybe that looses information, but i know i found what i searched, and don't continue to read all threads. Which could be a lot of work, in crowded forum, especially for least forum active users.

But it is harder to disrupt a whole conversation through editing, and less likely then just changing a thread title(who are often used stupid, like Help in help forum that quite a classic)

And even when bookmarks get implemented, i would use it more for importance peace of information like BB post, then for common forum chat which i mostly search and when you are off some days it is already not so easy to find a thread in the help section cause it is so active.

OK, let's try to solve it from a different angle.
Why not using a "soft-link"?
Meaning, allowing the name of that thread to be replaced, but it could be reached also from previous thread's name that will only connect to the thread.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 11/4/2011 4:42:31 AM

[qWhy not using a "soft-link"?
Meaning, allowing the name of that thread to be replaced, but it could be reached also from previous thread's name that will only connect to the thread.]

then you had multiplicate links there to, like "need hlp", "need help", "how to train Hans Sarpei" who all go to the same i don't know if it make that much better especially in forum like help english.

Why not using a "soft-link"?
Meaning, allowing the name of that thread to be replaced, but it could be reached also from previous thread's name that will only connect to the thread.]

then you had multiplicate links there to, like "need hlp", "need help", "how to train Hans Sarpei" who all go to the same i don't know if it make that much better especially in forum like help english.

There is no connection between your reply to the suggestion.
This could happen also now!
I guess that the GMs control it, but they also can control it under my suggestion.

I didn't said, "stop controling thread names".
I said, allow thread names to be edited and linked.
Both the old and new names must be valid.

This could happen also now!

if this happen now, we had to close it and the manager who does so get at least a warning.

There is no connection between your reply to the suggestion.

it was an example, there would be 2 name change links in the list of new threads and one additional for the normal threads. I believe you wanted it like the moved threads links, right?

I guess that the GMs control it, but they also can control it under my suggestion.

so we give the name change option, but don't allow to use it?

This could happen also now!

if this happen now, we had to close it and the manager who does so get at least a warning.

I've meant - Also now the users can create multiple thread's names, as you implied that can happen under my suggestion.

There is no connection between your reply to the suggestion.

it was an example, there would be 2 name change links in the list of new threads and one additional for the normal threads. I believe you wanted it like the moved threads links, right?

I'm not sure what you've menat.
What I've meant is.
There is a single thread - let's call it "memory" or "disk space".
And there will be (when there is only one name change) two soft links - names ("pointers") that just points to that "memory".

I guess that the GMs control it, but they also can control it under my suggestion.

so we give the name change option, but don't allow to use it?

Again, I don't have a clue what you've meant here.
I've meant - the GMs (probably) can change current thread's names when they are not proper (one way or another), and it could also be handled under my suggestion.

I've meant - Also now the users can create multiple thread's names, as you implied that can happen under my suggestion.

how? And why you suggest it then again?

I've meant - Also now the users can create multiple thread's names, as you implied that can happen under my suggestion.

how? And why you suggest it then again?

Let's try again...
You have claimed that my suggestion will create multiple threads with the same name.

I wrote that it is not so, as it is not so on current system.

It does not happen on current system as the GMs are hadnling it.
They could do the same under my suggestion definition.

Starting a new thread with a different name, but still talking about exactly the same thing, is not ok.