NationStates

Hello,

I'm the OP of the current iteration of one of the megathreads, however something has occurred to me.
The megathreads are now responsible for a vast amount of the discussion on nsg, around half of the threads on the top page of general are megathreads. Routinely, topics with a connection that might fit in one of them are merged into them for what I can see as pretty much no reason: if they're surviving as topics on their own, and one subject is clogging up the forums, then why merge them all together? Individual discussions from these merged threads have a tendency to get lost in the megathread they're merged into, resulting in an altogether less enriching debating experience for all. In the end this results in the discussion on a particular subject being dominated by a few posters, while previously when the topics were more individualised to smaller issues it was far easier for other posters to find something they were interesting.

For example, if the discussion was regarding 'Should assault weapons be banned?' that could go on for a very long time. If it gets merged into the gun control thread, however, it leads to that individual discussion being watered down and finally swamped by whatever else is going on in the megathread. I'm not seing a benefit to keeping the system going, but I am seing an enormous downside.

Theres Megathreads who fullfill certain functions like absorbing and containing certain kind of perma-drama-topics that often spread across the board otherwise. Specifically Abortion and Gun-Control come to mind.

However the watered down argument dominated by a few posters is not without merit on its own. So I am a bit on a fence on this matter.

God no.
Last thing we need is 50+ different threads on every slightly-but-not-really unrelated topic.

Nakena wrote:Theres Megathreads who fullfill certain functions like absorbing and containing certain kind of perma-drama-topics that often spread across the board otherwise. Specifically Abortion and Gun-Control come to mind.

However the watered down argument dominated by a few posters is not without merit on its own. So I am a bit on a fence on this matter.

They create other threads which spring up, but I wouldn't say they dominate the board to a problematic level.

No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Nakena wrote:Theres Megathreads who fullfill certain functions like absorbing and containing certain kind of perma-drama-topics that often spread across the board otherwise. Specifically Abortion and Gun-Control come to mind.

However the watered down argument dominated by a few posters is not without merit on its own. So I am a bit on a fence on this matter.

They create other threads which spring up, but I wouldn't say they dominate the board to a problematic level.

The only way to truly find out is if all Megathreads would be temporarily closed for a week or so. Subsequently developments are being observed.

Nakena wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:They create other threads which spring up, but I wouldn't say they dominate the board to a problematic level.

The only way to truly find out is if all Megathreads would be temporarily closed for a week or so. Subsequently developments are being observed.

That might not be a bad idea actually.

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

As a regular poster on the uk politics megathread you must know the wildly varying things that are discussed on it. The only connection that they have is that they're happening in the UK.

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

I second this with more emphasis. If we got rid of megathreads we’d probably have about 100 different threads of people talking about the same thing without even knowing about it. Clumping together similar topics is important because it helps reduce the clogging of the forums and the amount of threads the moderators have to check whenever there’s an issue.

Caleonia wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

I second this with more emphasis. If we got rid of megathreads we’d probably have about 100 different threads of people talking about the same thing without even knowing about it. Clumping together similar topics is important because it helps reduce the clogging of the forums and the amount of threads the moderators have to check whenever there’s an issue.

Additionally, on occasion there will be something that doesn’t mean that much on its own, but fits into a larger pattern.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

As a regular poster on the uk politics megathread you must know the wildly varying things that are discussed on it. The only connection that they have is that they're happening in the UK.

As do many of the other threads.
Now imagine that all those individual topics all got their own individual threads every single time even the slightest thing happened.
The boards would be a complete clusterfuck, which is exactly why megathreads are a thing to begin with.

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

Imagine a Trumpian Thread Inflation...

However the more I think about it the more GVH's idea has merit. Megathreads could be limited to topics which have an ongoing and constant news influx. Trump/MAGA would be one of them.

Juristonia wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:As a regular poster on the uk politics megathread you must know the wildly varying things that are discussed on it. The only connection that they have is that they're happening in the UK.

As do many of the other threads.
Now imagine that all those individual topics all got their own individual threads every single time even the slightest thing happened.
The boards would be a complete clusterfuck, which is exactly why megathreads are a thing to begin with.

By clusterfuck, you mean more varied, right? There was a time without megathreads, you know. It was better.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Juristonia wrote:As do many of the other threads.
Now imagine that all those individual topics all got their own individual threads every single time even the slightest thing happened.
The boards would be a complete clusterfuck, which is exactly why megathreads are a thing to begin with.

By clusterfuck, you mean more varied, right? There was a time without megathreads, you know. It was better.

But was it better because of the lack of Megathreads? Or did other factors play a role?

The one thing I noticed about Megathreads they are somewhat exclusionist towards outsiders as they tend to have their own sub-communities and regulars.

Nakena wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:By clusterfuck, you mean more varied, right? There was a time without megathreads, you know. It was better.

But was it better because of the lack of Megathreads? Or did other factors play a role?

The one thing I noticed about Megathreads they are somewhat exclusionist towards outsiders as they tend to have their own sub-communities and regulars.

Exactly. Anti-gun people are quite a rarety in the gun control megathread.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Nakena wrote:
But was it better because of the lack of Megathreads? Or did other factors play a role?

The one thing I noticed about Megathreads they are somewhat exclusionist towards outsiders as they tend to have their own sub-communities and regulars.

Exactly. Anti-gun people are quite a rarety in the gun control megathread.

Except in Australia, gun laws tend to be uh, less strict.

Caleonia wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

I second this with more emphasis. If we got rid of megathreads we’d probably have about 100 different threads of people talking about the same thing without even knowing about it. Clumping together similar topics is important because it helps reduce the clogging of the forums and the amount of threads the moderators have to check whenever there’s an issue.

Right now theres a lot of discussions and posters being clogged within the megathreads. They neither, as GVH has pointed out, properly fulfill their purpose to channalize certain topics into single thread but create just little echo chambers for a handful of users.

HSaboteur wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:Exactly. Anti-gun people are quite a rarety in the gun control megathread.

Except in Australia, gun laws tend to be uh, less strict.

This isn't the gun control thread.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:This isn't the gun control thread.

Speaking about: I recall several shooting spree threads having been closed due derailment as discussions drifted into the gun control debate. Apparently the presence of the Gun-Control Thread did not prevent this from happening.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Juristonia wrote:As do many of the other threads.
Now imagine that all those individual topics all got their own individual threads every single time even the slightest thing happened.
The boards would be a complete clusterfuck, which is exactly why megathreads are a thing to begin with.

By clusterfuck, you mean more varied, right? There was a time without megathreads, you know. It was better.

Yeah, I know. I was here, and no, it was not.

Nakena wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:This isn't the gun control thread.

Speaking about: I recall several shooting spree threads having been closed due derailment as discussions drifted into the gun control debate. Apparently the presence of the Gun-Control Thread did not prevent this from happening.

Threadjacking will always be a thing, though I do think that threads talking about mass shootings should go into the gun control thread by default.

There's no reason why this has to be all or nothing. It's possible to close some megathreads while keeping others.

Personally, I would keep the religious ones, but close some of the political ones, particularly the feminist thread.

They fragment debate by forcing stuff that arises organically in another thread to move elsewhere, and they end up cliquey and dominated by the same old suspects memeing at each other in echo-chambers/cuddle-corners (or in the case of places like the feminist thread, screechy hatehouses) rather than normal and balanced on-topic discussion, becoming a barrier rather than a benefit to debate.

More threads being created on short-term issues and events would be a good thing and would increase traffic in this era of declining post-rates.

Shut 'em down, lock 'em up.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:No. Megathreads perform a vital function. Can you imagine the amount of guff that NSGeneral would be filled with if the MAGAthread wasn't a thing? There would be a new thread every time Trump tweeted.

No.

As a regular poster on the uk politics megathread you must know the wildly varying things that are discussed on it. The only connection that they have is that they're happening in the UK.

The vast majority of the time they are related to UK politics. I'd rather have that all in one place, as I don't have the time to constantly scan NSGeneral for anything and everything related to UK politics in the event that the megathread is closed.

The New California Republic wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:As a regular poster on the uk politics megathread you must know the wildly varying things that are discussed on it. The only connection that they have is that they're happening in the UK.

The vast majority of the time they are related to UK politics. I'd rather have that all in one place, as I don't have the time to constantly scan NSGeneral for anything and everything related to UK politics in the event that the megathread is closed.

Some Megathreads have certainly their purpose, others do less so.