Just started one in IMHO, and I’d like to start another, unrelated one in CS. But would it be out of line to start two different threads within minutes of each other?
(I suppose depending on how long it takes to get a reply, it could become a moot point.)
Two new threads in two different forums isn’t going to raise any eyebrows. If you’ve got three or four threads currently running on the front page of a single forum, and you’re thinking of starting another one, that’s probably a good sign that you need to turn off the computer and go outside. Other than that, don’t worry about it.
Okay; thanks!
Dude, there are some folks here who start a new thread every five minutes. You’re good.
There’s a problem with starting new threads? I can see if you’re starting “pimp my site” or trolling threads or any other rules violations, but just asking a series of questions or starting several topics/debates that interest you? Where’s the harm?
I got slapped once for starting three threads in an hour. I’unno: maybe there’d been an influx of trolls recently and the mods were jittery.
Should I be the smart-aleck who points out that you also just started one in ATMB?
Well, you were about twenty hours late saying that…
Maybe if you started 3 Pit threads in an hour, someone would suggest you take a breather for your own good. Otherwise, I’m having a hard time seeing why you were flagged.
As Miller says, unless you’re hogging front-page space in a single forum, it shouldn’t be a problem. Since I don’t know who “slapped” you (made a comment? issued a warning?) for starting three threads in an hour (all in one forum? in different forums?), I can’t speculate on why that would have provoked a response from a mod.
As it is, three threads in an hour, esp. in three separate forums, doesn’t seem problematical to me.
Okay then.
I still don’t see how “hogging front-space” is a problem. I mean, if the three threads are interesting an on topic for the forum, then why is is suddenly a problem that they were started by the same person? So what? They’re still interesting, on target, and the only way they stay on the front page is if other people are responding, right?
Why would anyone get in trouble for using the board too much? Sure, spam posting or dropping 27 threads in a row with stupid inane questions that don’t really have answers or other rude behaviors that are rude in themselves, yeah, but just using the forums as intended and having more than one thread topic to start when you are actually available to follow them? That makes no sense at all.
I didn’t say that it would evoke a mod comment, just that it might. And it might if the person were hogging space by starting lots of threads, probably more than three at a time, over the course of several days or weeks. This has been known to happen with overeager new members, where someone will have 15 or 20 or more threads started in a single forum – esp. when that person doesn’t seem to be participating in the threads after starting them. (“Front page space” is, of course, a reference back to when form displays only showed the 50 most recent threads – that setting was changed a couple of years ago, so the concept is vestigal at this point anyway.)
This is all completely hypothetical, of course. The question was, is starting three threads within an hour going to get someone in trouble, and the answer was “no.”
Okay, that registers under the jerk meter. Starting dozens of threads and then not participating in them, that is worthy of a comment, even if the threads are spread out across a year rather than a day or week. It may be less noticed if spread over a year, but it is still a bad behavior.
*I made it up.
It doesn’t, which is why we keep saying it’s not a problem.
We had a case a few months ago where a relatively new poster was starting a lot of threads in GQ, and at one point had about 10 on the front page. We got complaints, and there was even a Pit thread about it. However, the threads were generally rather interesting questions, so I saw no reason to do anything about it. If they had been a lot of inane questions, I might have, but that would be because of the nature of the threads, not their number.
I will note that the registration agreement has this to say:
So three threads all on pretty much the same topic in a short period of time might be too much. If they were on different topics, they wouldn’t.
Why would participation matter? I leave threads for a few days if my question hasn’t been answered yet, or if I’m trying to stimulate discussion about a particular topic and the discussion is going along fine without me. I would only participate if a) thanking whoever for answering my question (thus signaling the thread is not useful anymore), b) I had new information to add or c) the discussion has gone off topic and needs to re-focus.
Imho, it’s kind of sad when the discussion is so dead that the only person left posting is the OP, and they put up the last 10 posts in a row.
Depends in part on the kind of thread, and in which forum. However, I have the distinct impression that some posters post threads and then never come back to even read them, much less participate (e.g. certain GQ threads where subsequent posters ask the OP to clarify something about their question, and they never reply).
I’ve had troubles with individuals on various boards who would post half a dozen (or more) times in an hour. The posts were all nearly content-less paste jobs about items current in the news. The OPs would generally consist of a headline, a paragraph or so of copy/pasted material, a link, and something along the lines of “This is great!” (or "This sucks!) followed by a “What do you think?”
Luckily, our Straight Dope culture limits this sort of thing. Here, the thread starter is likely to be hammered–and rightly so–with demands that the OP be fleshed out before any serious discussion begins.
ETA: Forgot to add that as long as the OP does the fleshing out from the beginning–puts a little work into it–then I don’t see a problem with starting multiple threads in a short time.
Just as an aside, I wonder if the poster sometimes simply forgets about their thread. For absentee OPs who are fairly new to the board, perhaps someone could drop them a PM about Thread Subscriptions so that they would know how to keep up with their threads? They may not know.