rogerd - 8:48 pm on Dec 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Threaded discussion software lets individual threads head in multiple, meandering directions. This makes certain things easy, like replying directly to a post that might appear on an earlier page in a linear forum (like WebmasterWorld). To me, though, a large, threaded topic is kind of difficult to read.

From a usability and searchability standpoint, these threads aren't very good either. Perhaps the original post was, "Are apples good for your heart health?" After a few posts, someone makes the comment, "Oranges are better for you," resulting in a sequence of orange-related posts. Then, another poster posts a list of apple vs. orange pros & cons, producing another series of posts. Meanwhile, the original poster is still trying to get an answer to his basic question about apples...

It's very moderator time-intensive, but I'd tend to split this into a few parts, adding an "health benefits of oranges" thread and an "apples vs. oranges" thread. This gives clear focus to each one, and creates a more useful archive than one long, random thread that heads in different directions.

In real life, of course, lots of these threads develop without intervention. Few forums are so intensely moderated that every digression can either be turned back to the topic or split into a new discussion. I'll usually let minor excursions stand, but if someone raises a really good point that's somewhat off-topic, I'll route that to a new thread.