Topic: Handling Replies and Mentions in Forum Threads (Read 338 times)

Exactly what CryptopreneurBrainboss has said above. All are saying same thing from different directions. The rule is that you don't post consecutively. But if someone replies after you, you are free to drop another post. You can also post consecutively if you quoted someone in the first reply and then reply something independent in the second reply. If I'm wrong I should be corrected.

It depends on the board. In meta for instance, the second style is mostly used. But in gambling discussion mega threads, people tend to use the first, especially people who has high posting requirements.

No one is perfect and this is not about being an old/experienced user or not, there could be more quality posts you would like to reply to at times, and at times, there may be none. Imagine having 12 quality posts to reply to in just a 2-page thread, that's a whole lot of work. Well, I have never been overwhelmed with this, what I do is start from the beginning and reply to them bit by bit. I may start by replying to 4-5 posts today with their initial post quoted with them, then proceed to do that the next day as well.

Before you know it, in a few days, you would have completed the reply. But at times, as you reply, more relies are coming, so you continue to do that and fix the old inside the new posts. Alternatively, it is not a must that you reply all post no matter how quality they are, it is our choice. So, you might fight the temptation of replying to all but choose the most qualified ones that are deserving of your reply.

There is no agreement on how to post for replies.

If I am a user makes a reply, above my posts, there are some posts that I want to discuss, I can quote all of them and reply them in my single post.

If I make a reply, after that reply, another user comes with a post, I can quote his post and make my new reply. Here, I have another choice to reply, quote it and edit my previous reply. Both styles don't break forum rules but posters often choose a first style than a second style.

Obviously I didn't say you should reply in a row (post in a row), I said you can post provided you didn't break the rules of the forum which means after a forum user have commented you can reply.. E.g Mr A commented and you have something to reply him, you can reply him. Mr B commented and you have something to reply, you can also reply him or you wait and reply them both in one reply. Both posting pattern is accepted and you didn't break any rules when you reply in both ways but if you reply in a row, both replies will be merge by a moderator.

Not that this matters though as I gotten answer to my question. I stand to be corrected, but as I read what you have written, it looks as if there is a rule concerning this which is rule 32 in the Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules¹.


What do you think?

---

1. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unofficial-list-of-official-bitcointalkorg-rules-guidelines-faq-703657

Do you that's how I want to start this response because there's no special way of replying. If there was the administrators of the forum would had outlined that in the rules. You can decide to reply everyone on your threads that's your choice provided you aren't spamming the forum or just doing that to increase your weekly post count. If everyone is saying something different and you feel their response deserves a response from you then go ahead and quote them to reply. You can decide to quote them individually or simultaneously with one reply (everything depends on you). There are some replies that requires you to not quote others so you can take your time to respond to that particular reply without making your post look crowded/difficult for some forum users to comprehend.

I love when there are sub discussions on a thread as it makes the thread to look more of human discussion and not bots because that's how the forum is looking more like this days because of the introduction/development of AIs. Just to summarize, any reply worth having a response from you shouldn't be ignored but attended to. Nobody has the right to question how you're responding to replies on your thread when your reply is in accordance to the rules of the forum (they aren't spams/off topics).

Precisely. Some comments are not actually making sense and are not on point of the topic, so why waste your time and bother yourself replying. Read them but learn to filter when you aim to give a good reply in return. Also, your replies are also readable by everyone, so if you fail to reply on some other comments which are mostly repetitive, at least they can also read your replies from other comments.

Nice that you understood what I meant, in the gambling section, you can see upto 6 nested replies, such that if you begin to edit them to locate the one you are replying to, it takes alot of time.

Works best with merit sources because they will always or most of the times be on merits.

If LoyceV creates a thread, he follows it up and replies everyone necessary to be replied in that thread, I think it's a good idea.

Y'all reply to every single mentions just to increase post count? Huh?.. well, everyone has a posting pattern and, it becomes incombent on the poster to understand where and to which mention they should reply to.
You could also merit anyone in concordance, rather than replying everyone at once.
The continuous repetition by several users, in their own words would often make the Convo very boring.. Just like a user said, most of those replies are made to fulfill their post count - At the end, there's barely nothing innovative about it.

It's a strategy that I sometimes use, but if you don't have enough sMerits (and many don't) then you can't practice it often. However, as in everything, it is necessary to find a balance between what you have and what you can do with it. Also, multiquote and editing of posts to which we reply and what I personally do (changing the font size) to make the visual impression more pleasant is also something that makes sense to me.

In addition, if there are really a lot of posts that someone thinks should be answered, and at the same time these posts are more or less similar in content, we can thank everyone who contributed, which certainly seems polite and indicates that we have read all the posts.

I usually just reply to the post that catch my attention and also the latest one especially if I notice the replies late since many user usually answer the inquiry for me if the question can be answered by general knowledge.

When it comes to opening a thread. You don’t need to reply all of them but only those post that makes you interested. You have the right to ignore post especially if you don’t like the content.



This is the right thing to do but of course check other replies also if the question is already answered just like what I mention above.

You could technically reply to them without actually replying by meriting their post (of course, if it's meritable).

Reply only when... further explanation/information/value/thoughts is need to be added (in your opinion).

For example, some days ago, I made a post about "How to properly report a post to the Mods?". In response, many gave me relevant links to that question, some gave me their advice and opinion.

And among those replies I responded only 3-4 times. Those who gave me links, I didn't reply but gave them 1 merit. By this action, I indirectly thanked them, so no reply was needed. I assume you understood what I meant.

I have gotten the clarity I was seeking for my question. I appreciate everyone who is chipped in their opinion. From now on, I won't respond to every mention unless it's a direct question or there's a misunderstanding from a user's comment that needs clarification, such as providing more examples, explanations, or resources.

You want to reply after 5+ replies? it's fine.
You want to reply after a day? it's fine.
You want to keep replying every post over and over? it's still fine even though other users might think you're trying to fill quota campaign.

What I don't understand is someone had replied a post, but he choose to create a new post to reply an old post when he actually can reply it on his first post!

Let's say I post this post to reply @OP, but after next few users replied this topic, I create a new post to reply @PX-Z's post (the second poster) while now I can read his post and replied him right now.

I often notice that replies to a post are not in a questioning tone, and quoting a post is just an additional statement. Further, my nickname is mentioned by other users, but this is no longer a direct quotation but a whole chain of answers. It’s natural why you should enter into this conversation, although it can hardly be called a conversation, but just a repetition of what was said, in other words. I would ask users who like such answers not to engage in such paraphrasing.

You actually don't have to reply all mentions on the forum. Some members might just be making references to your post and thus mentioned you on theirs. On gambling board, when I get mentioned I know mostly that someone just quoted my old replies so all I do is to read them and see it it needs me to respond to.

 Sometimes you get mentioned in some threads where you obviously don't have to reply like monthly stats or rank up threads. Just ignore some mentions after reading through not all you have to reply to.

When I get quoted, the review I get from the telegram bot tells me if it's worth replying or not. Sometimes not all quotes are important to be replied this is because sometimes when people quote you, they just elaborate or explain better what you had said previously. To some persons, replying such posts over and over again is considered as spam however it also depends on they type and reason of the post in question.
If such a post is probably a question on a problem that the op needed fixing you can try as much as possible to assist like most forum members do till the problem is eventually solved ( if it can be solved). If you should observe closely you would notice that it would not even be necessary for you to just reply all quotes you get.

just like logfiles has mentioned, not every reply is worth replying to and you don't have to really feel obligated to reply to every post, just reply to those that really caught your attention. also, if the thread gets a lot of replies in a short time, it'll be best to wait and let the replies come in and then respond to them at once.

It is still easy if you will take time to multiple quotes especially if you are the OP of the thread regardless what board it is, ignore repetitive answers/reply and answer only those interest you.

About on the replies, i know bunch of users there tend to quote the whole block of text instead of quoting only the interest ones, even it was already 3 nested quotes already, and it annoys me since you still receive notification of it.

Not every comment under the thread is worth replying to... Especially in the gambling discussion board where you can post, go to sleep, wake up and find that there are over 40 replies, most of which are even repetitive. I think you know this. Maybe just respond to only replies of substance and ignore those that are low quality.

Quoting all the replies in one posts is also another good way as suggested, but I am pretty sure you are going to see how tiring it is