On 'Double Posting'...

[Cheesegear]

Sometimes I see a thread in which I have been the last poster, but, it's been a day or so since the last post. Is it okay to double post if I - or whoever wants to double post - have something new to the discussion that is entirely unrelated to the previous post?

Editing posts neither alerts people via subscription notices, nor bumps a thread to the top of the page with a 'New Post' icon. How are people to know if or when I Edit a post unless they've been notified of my doing so? :smallconfused:

Is there a time sanction (is that the word I'm looking for?) on when it is okay to Double-, Multi-, Ultra- or even MONSTER Post?
Well - in regards to that last one - let's hope no-one has to post 5 times in a row...:smallannoyed:

10 hours? 24 hours? Three days?

[Dallas-Dakota]

{Advice struck-through, just so no one thinks it's good advice.}

You can always ctrl-c the content of your old post, delete it.
Paste it into your new post, add a dividing line if you want and then type up your new content and thus post a new post.

This would mean
1. No double post.
2. Thread has your new info.
3. Thread gives ''new post'' symbol.

Or in simple/clearer steps:
1. Copy the content of your post.
(1B. Paste it into a text file, just for the case whatever happens.)
2. Delete old post.
3. Make new post.
4. Paste old post content into new post.
5. Type up new content.
6. Post.

[Cheesegear]

You can always ctrl-c the content of your old post, delete it.
Paste it into your new post, add a dividing line if you want and then type up your new content and thus post a new post.

This would mean
1. No double post.
2. Thread has your new info.
3. Thread gives ''new post'' symbol.

Would also send out 'New Post' e-mails to those who've subscribed, right? Sounds like a plan. Thanks.

[Killer Angel]

You can always ctrl-c the content of your old post, delete it.
Paste it into your new post, add a dividing line if you want and then type up your new content and thus post a new post.


Simple and elegant.

Sometime, I think a double post can be OK. I've seen Loooooong post, in which a poster answered to 4 or 5 different quotes of the same person, followed by other answers to other different users.
Answering to it it's a headhache, it's better to have a double or triple post.


example. sorry Argall if I'm "using" you.

[lesser_minion]

I'd be slightly worried about the possibility of stealth bumping using Dallas-Dakota's method, but I don't think it would be a problem.

I think Roland might prefer it if you PM'd him and asked him to bump the thread, or something like that. Although that doesn't really solve your problems.

[The Dark Fiddler]

Just a side note, I think mods generally don't stop you from double posting if it's your thread for something like a webcomic, art thread, Let's Play, PbP game, and such.

If they do, I'm in trouble. :smalleek:

[Irbis]

Simple and elegant.

And, incidentally, creates far more load on server - plus the possibility of cluttering up the database.

I think doublepost rule should be deleted altogether, changed to combat excessive spamming only, or not count for meritorical/ontopic posts.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff of Moddingham: Much of the time advice from fellow posters is helpful. Here it is not. Doing what Dallas-Dakota suggests is frowned upon.

Don't double post. Use the edit feature. If no one wants to reply to your post, then it should fall away into oblivion. Bumping it to keep it active is one of the things the double post rule is meant to prevent. Stealth bumping it, as DD suggests, is even worse because you give the illusion that something new has been posted (and you're trying to game the rules).

Just edit your post or wait until someone else posts.

If you want an exception to the rule, as with the thread necromancy rule, PM a mod and ask for it. Such exceptions should be rare.


Sometime, I think a double post can be OK.
This is true, but not in the context you state below. It's allowed if you have permission. Or, if it's in your own PbP game, we're likely to overlook it, unless it's excessive.



I've seen Loooooong post, in which a poster answered to 4 or 5 different quotes of the same person, followed by other answers to other different users. Answering to it it's a headhache, it's better to have a double or triple post.

"Better" in a subjective sense maybe, but still against the Forum Rules.