In the past, we usually tried to close a thread at 50 posts so it wouldn't take so long to load. I noticed some threads have gone beyond the 50 post mark and eventually offer the option of page 2, etc.. We use the same software at my Association's Bulletin Board and we never set a limit on posts in a thread. As a matter of fact, one thread just surpassed the 1000 post mark.

The question is do we, or don't we allow a thread past 50 posts. I like the idea of not starting a part 2 or part 3 of the topic. Sometimes that causes people to lose a little interest. What do you think?

Just back from Block Island..

Bob

The reason we decide to do it at 50 was for those who use dial-up to connect and especially on threads with a lot of images..

Plus it gave the moderator something to do while they maintained a forum...

Can you adjust the software to go to a second page when 50 posts are hit?

When my screen painting thread got to 22 posts, many of them with a lot of photos, I thought it was too long, so I started another one. I hope that was OK. I think 25 is enough if there are a lot of pictures.

I agree with grandmaR ... it depends on the sizeof individual posts. But I would have thought 50 is enough ... and I don't mind the PtII PtIII threads... I don't think we should stop a discussion at any time. But keep it to "bit size chunks"

IMO, the 50 post rule has become very handy in some scenarios, such as photo threads. It can get pretty annoying to be trying to see that ONE post at the end, but you can't get to it because the loading pictures keep jostling you about. And then, after all this aggrivation, that post says "Nice shots {name}!" (Not against the compliment...just...well, you can infer...)

However, in threads that are all text (such as a simple long discussion, or a game), I personally feel it's pointless to cut off at 50 posts. These threads could go to hundreds and we'd be fine.

From my internet habits poll (which I apparently am "not authorised" to view the results of - I CREATED IT! I AM THE MOST AUTHORISED TO VIEW THE RESULTS OF IT!!!!!!!) not that many people are on dial-up. Now, I'm not one to say "punish the dialupers for their choice in connection," but I feel that the internet has come to the point where making pages dial-up ready is becoming a lowest-common-denominator thing. If you get what I mean.

If there was a way to make the cutoff 50 posts, that'd be a good solution. The one annoying thing about the way that things work with the current system is that posts are very easily split up - part I can get separated (usually permanently) from part II by a few people making the last reply to a few interim posts. A second part that lasts a long time could spend forever a page, or more, separated from its sibling in the annals of CF history.

Every other forum I belong to uses the page system. On one, there's a game that's gone on for 800 pages. It's all text, though, so it doesn't matter. If it was photos, even on my broadband connection, I think I'd die. I want to bring it over here (I've had an idea draught in Games land), but not if I'm creating new threads every 50 posts.

I think, if nothing else, a new, flexible policy towards the 50 post rule might be best. We've let a few threads bleed over lately, and the CF didn't explode. Maybe retain the 50 post rule for threads with many images, and remove it for anything text-based. If it bleeds onto other pages, it'll take just as long to load page 2 as Part II.

Just my sort of humble opinion.