"Double posting" -- I don't get it

[qeltar]

In a thread yesterday I replied to two different people. I usually reply using the "quote" feature, so I did this with two posts. They were done one after the other, and both had relevant comments.

 

Some time later an admin edited these two posts into one and chastised me for "double posting".

 

Sorry, but I don't really get what the problem is here. And if I need to reply to multiple people where I quote each of them, doing so in one post seems like a real pain.. I'd have to hit quote, copy paste, then back out and do the other one, etc.

 

Thanks.

[DarkDude]

There's a multi-quote button for this exact reason.

 

Hit the multiquote button on the posts you want to quote, when you have them all selected press add reply and voila, it's done.

 

Double posting is really only allowed when the posts are completely separate from each other, made a fair time apart etc.

[jimmy_jim]

And if I need to reply to multiple people where I quote each of them, doing so in one post seems like a real pain.. I'd have to hit quote, copy paste, then back out and do the other one, etc.

 

Thanks.

 

I didn't work out how to double quote without doing that until last year.. :wall:

 

 

 

I saw the post you're referring to, it's no biggie :wink: These things happen all the time, they're just merged as not to clutter up the thread.

[Sy_Accursed]

Well double posting looks spammish and it isn't that bad to avoid, especially since the new forum in the bottom corner of each post has "reply" and "multiquote"

 

Reply gives u the normal quote reply, multiquote highlights then when you go to the main reply button you get all the quotes waiting for you.

[qeltar]

Okay, thanks about the multiquote, hadn't considered that.

 

I still don't get why it matters if both posts are reasonable. Sometimes you respond to one post and then notice you want to reply to another, later on. What does it matter?

[Racheya]

Because it's clutter, instead of just editing in the extra bit that you wanted to post it means there's a whole extra post on the thread and while it isn't a huuuuge problem, it does make the thread more cluttered in a way.

[ovorette]

The tone of that edit was ridiculous considering the offense and the offender. A simple note about how to use the multi-quote function would have been helpful and enlightening for those of us who don't know how to use it, as opposed to an admonishment about double posting.

 

I don't mean to sound harsh but this is the type of moderating that stops careful and thoughtful people from posting.

[Youmu]

That's why you use the multi-quote feature on the page. Double posting just clutters the page, and takes up a post in it.

Remember, each page can only hold 20 posts, and it sometimes can be a pain due to having to go to the next page.

 

I miss the quote button back in the old forums though. That one was definitely easier to find and use.

[Racheya]

The tone of that edit was ridiculous considering the offense and the offender. A simple note about how to use the multi-quote function would have been helpful and enlightening for those of us who don't know how to use it, as opposed to an admonishment about double posting.

 

I don't mean to sound harsh but this is the type of moderating that stops careful and thoughtful people from posting.

It's not like he got in trouble for doing it.

 

It's along the same sort of lines as when we move threads into the right forum. The person needs to be asked to try and not do it again, but then something needs to be done by the moderator (eg moving the thread or merging the posts) otherwise it's a mess still.

 

Once you get used to the quote system here it's easier than phpBB imo.

[Sy_Accursed]

I think one thing people are missing in this.

 

Yes you making 1 double post without a big time gap may be okay (aside from looking slightly spammy); but if it was allowed everyone would be doing it. And then it wouldnt be one double post that looks slightly spammy it'd be thread after thread of people just posting again and again and again without anybody else responding. That's where the real problem lies so to make it clear cut and simple all double posting isn't allowed.

[Kill_Life]

Two reasons:

- Else it becomes too much a mess (threads where someone would post 10 times, 10 seperate posts after eachother to quote 10 people are a mess) and there's the flood limit.

- To stop post-count farmers. Some love it.

[Rainy_Day]

The tone of that edit was ridiculous considering the offense and the offender. A simple note about how to use the multi-quote function would have been helpful and enlightening for those of us who don't know how to use it, as opposed to an admonishment about double posting.

 

I don't mean to sound harsh but this is the type of moderating that stops careful and thoughtful people from posting.

I fail to see how the tone was rediculous? It's well known that double posting is in general disallowed, especially considering the tools available to you on the forum. When someone double posts within a few minutes it makes the page look messy and is not necessary (posts tend to have a high character limit for a reason). As Kill_Life said, many people do this for post-count, which I am sure makes it annoying for people who fit all they have to say in one post, then see others going ahead making multiple posts which can easily fit into the first post.

 

In response to qeltar's post, you were not chastised. Your posts were merged and a note was left telling you not to do it, that can hardly be considered a punishment.

[DarkDude]

Going to lock this thread here, as it really is verging on "Discussing moderator decisions". You've been given a answer and told how to use the multi-quote function, no point continuing as there's really no more discussion to be had here.