[BostonCard]

Merging threads is not censorship.

Perhaps no, but burying various critical thoughts in a massive, incomprehensible hodgepodge certainly is. . . .

When I merged the threads (and yes, it was me), I didn't realize how difficult to follow the resulting thread would be, as a result of it not being clear what individual posts were replies to what.  I think the board software places replies in chronological rather hierarchical order.  While I think that is generally better, it does create challenges for merging "mature" threads.  Moreover, as I should no doubt be aware, a thread that starts out a certain way can veer in a very unpredictable direction. I should have limited merging to near duplicative threads with only a handful of posts each.

That being said, I do think posters have some responsibility to try to minimize thread spam. We could all do with the reminder to try to keep related posts together under one thread.

BC

[BostonCard]

Merging threads is not censorship.

Perhaps no, but burying various critical thoughts in a massive, incomprehensible hodgepodge certainly is. . . .

When I merged the threads (and yes, it was me), I didn't realize how difficult to follow the resulting thread would be, as a result of it not being clear what individual posts were replies to what.  I think the board software places replies in chronological rather hierarchical order.  While I think that is generally better, it does create challenges for merging "mature" threads.  Moreover, as I should no doubt be aware, a thread that starts out a certain way can veer in a very unpredictable direction. I should have limited merging to near duplicative threads with only a handful of posts each.

That being said, I do think posters have some responsibility to try to minimize thread spam. We could all do with the reminder to try to keep related posts together under one thread.

BC