I don’t know if this would help or not, but suppose for the GQ forum (at the very least), we had a page of links to threads which seem to come up frequently. So instead of having someone flog the hamster to see if a thread’s been done before, they could jump to the page which lists topics that seem to come up quite often. They can then skim the threads to see if their particular question’s been answered. (Let me guess, this idea’s come up a lot but can’t be done for reasons which can be found in this and this thread.)
I think it’s a good idea, but making such a comprehensive list is no easy task. I thought about doing that with just Physics threads at one point. I got about three down before I realized it would take forever. Do you have a good idea for harvesting these threads?
I second (or third) this suggestion. For selection we don’t need to have an exhaustive list. Simply the subjects that pop up frequently would suffice. We’d update it as we go along. Then the next time such a subject comes up you could simply post: see here.
Suggestions:
- gry
- duck’s quak echo
- time machines
- gravity questions
I’d be able to think of more, but as it so happens the current list of GQ is remarkably free from repetitive questions.
I’d also like there to be a list of SDMB idom, which however may not be GQ. The teemingmillions page has some idiom explained, but a lot of it isn’t. Stuff like
- when come back, bring pie,
- has jumped the shark,
- Hi Opal,
- my cat’s breath reeks of …
Some older threads are explicitly devoted to these. I’ve on occasion asked about some of these and seen others ask about it as well; seen the explanation of most of these too. Still the last one mentioned and some others I can’t remember right now still have me mystified.
But maybe it is part of the charm of SDMB that these little things are not explained but left for the uninitiated to uncover for themselves. I’m sure they spell out a secret message when I’ve got them all. I’m still hoping for a T-shirt when I reach that point. 
Sadly, no. Some, I think, though, should be fairly obvious such as those threads relating to glurge e-mail. (Words ending with “gry” anyone?) Others, would be more difficult, but perhaps we could do something similar to the way we do threadspotting (of course, someone other than Tubadiva would have to volunteer to handle the resulting deluge of e-mails which this would create).
My comments were directed at Achernar’s posts, not TTT’s.
We’re still waiting for people to read the @#$%in’ FAQ before asking “Why can’t I edit my posts?” Appropriately, it’s taking longer than we thought.
Well, on things like ducks quacking and -gry, one hopes that a new poster might look in the Archives. If they don’t look in the Archives, why would we think they might search the Message Boards?
True, but fer us “Old Timers” who’re inclined to search to post the various threads which have been done to death and post 'em in response to a newbie’s question, it could prove helpful.
Let’s not be too hasty, here. I, for one, would be sorely disappointed to see an end to new time machine or gravity threads. They’re really not at all in the same category as the first two on your list. Gry and quacks, there’s one absolute answer, and once you’ve got that answer, there’s really not much left to discuss. But do you have any idea just how many gravity questions there are? I don’t, and gravity is my professional specialization! Once you’ve seen one gravity question, you sure as heck haven’t seen them all.
You’re right, Chronos. That was a bit quick, as I realized when I hit the Submit-button. What I meant was, that some questions in that area have been done repeatedly and it is handy to have a fixed reference for basic information. I meant things like ‘what happens if you drop a ball in an elevator’. But maybe even those questions give rise to a sufficiently lively debat to make it worthwhile.
With respect to the ‘time machine’, it seems even less fit. I was triggered by the alarming rate at which these threads seemed to pop up for a while, but maybe they were all about different things. (I’ve seen ideas about black holes/wormholes etc.)
Maybe this shows that the fixed thread idea is not such a good idea after all. OTHO another poster was recently rapped because he couldn’t find the previous threads on race being a social construct or not. Some kind of ‘index’ or ‘reference’ might be handy, at least for those among us who are willing to go find it without overloading the search functin.
Using www.boardreader.com when possible helps to take the load off the SDMB search.
TTT and/or Tuckerfan, you could set up a page o’ links yourselves on some free hosting site. Then post an announcement, put it in your sigs, and see what the response is. That is, if the admins say it’s okay.
rowrrbazzle, I don’t think that the mods would have a problem with that. Something needs to be done, though, I think. And we need to include on the reference page the instructions for searching using Board Reader. I’ve tried to use it, but frankly, I can’t figure out how to work it so that it only shows Dope threads.
Outside of GQ, some of the threads which probably ought to be on the reference page are the Ultimate Recipe threads, and the various “Ask the…” which have gotten a large number of responses.
You need to always include “straightdope” as one of your search words. That’s on all of our pages, and presumably not many of anyone else’s.
I does that, but still end up getting links to non-Dope sites.