Proposal to Summarize Long Threads

[ChrisGreaves]

I went looking for Parental Controls today and found a thread started on January 11th 2011 by none other than me. To my horror the thread is nine pages long.
I don’t have the time to wade through nine pages and ferret out the simple way to implement this, so I thought we (which is to say, you) should support a system whereby the initiator of a long thread might accept responsibility to build a single post with one, or two, levels:-
(1) A quick-start brain-dead easy-implementation solution to give the reader a feel for what the thread tries to accomplish and
(2) A step-by-step path to the complete process (with links to other posts in the thread for the screenshots, Traps for Young Players etc.) for those who want to achieve the pinnacle of success reached by Hans/Rudi/Andy/et al..

It is obvious to me that unless I am careful I shall be nominated, and possibly elected, to run through my nine pages and provide the quick-start and complete-process text to show you all what can be done.

OK. I volunteer to summarize the Jan 11 2011 thread.⁽¹⁾

Before I procrastinate , I’d appreciate hearing comments and suggestions as to how we might adopt this suggestion in a semi-formal manner.

(1) At what time might a moderator suggest to the thread originator that a summary would be a good idea?

(2) How might we have a second member run through the proposed summary post to make sure that its one or two methods function correctly?

(3) Is the summary post always relegated to the end of the thread (near Page 10 in my case), or can it go anywhere as long as a link is made from the first post at the head of the thread?

(4) The “parental controls” thread lends itself to my suggested two-level solutions suggestion, but what other types of summary might be required for lengthy threads?

(5) The moderators’ decision to summarize can include a decision based on whether the length of the thread is mainly due to hijacking with social or light comment (I am guilty of this, I know)

(6) Other thoughts?

Thanks
Chris
⁽¹⁾ While realising that if THIS thread is successfully long ...
C

[Argus]

Good luck with that; some, ahem, can't decide which solution to use, if any.

[Before reading past the first few sentences]
OK, when you have read the 9 pages and done what you propose above.

I think the lounge is too small for this level of sophistication.

[HansV]

I agree with Argus - this is not going to happen.

[jstevens]

Chris,

Out of curiosity, which thread has the most pages?

[John Gray]

Chris: surely the solution is for you to write many fewer words...?
(I always think that you are unnecessarily prolix!)

[HansV]

@jstevens: the topic (thread) with the highest number of replies is Xmas Word Association Game from 202, with 555 replies.
#2 is Best FREE Software (Used and Rated by Loungers) with 327 replies.

I wouldn't like to summarize either!

[BobH]

The Free Software thread has come up twice today and reminds me of a question I've had for awhile now.

Is there a simple, easy way to create a way to query this information? I was thinking that one might wish to search for a certain type of product, a product by name, or by publisher name.

It's been too long since I've used Excel to remember how one does this or if it is even possible. On occasion, I have resorted to opening the file in Excel and sorting by column to find information but I sometimes get ranges wrong and make other errors. An approach that enforced a search discipline would be nice, I think.

[HansV]

The workbook in the first post of the Best FREE Software thread is from 2016, but it covers most of the thread (more than 15 of its 17 pages). You can easily sort the table by column C (App Type), or filter this column. When you want to sort, click in a cell of the column; do not select the entire column.

[Doc.AElstein]

I think your idea Chris is basically sound.
But my 2 cents is that the amount of Threads appropriate for such treatment is relatively too small to warrant a formal or even semi formal approach.
I think in my 5 years or so as a regular in a dozen or so places, I can think of some Threads from me, you, and just a few other people that could benefit from the such. It is a miniscule number compared to the mass of more shorter Threads
As a Moderator for a couple of years I only once did something along the lines of what you are suggesting , ( or rather a few times for the same OP’s Threads). But I was partly responsible for the Monster Threads since the guy ( a currently absent friend of ours here ) had nigh on a hundred Threads all very similar. As I took it on myself to merge them down to about half a dozen I thought I would add a first post index in them , ( as well as a warning to the world in general about the extraordinary phenomena that that OP was/ is!) But once again, that was an exception. ( I wouldn’t like to think that on this planet there was more than one OP like that one… )
_.____
I think maybe the odd occasion that something like you suggest could be useful to do, somebody doing it without a formal set of guidelines on doing it is OK.
_.___
Occasionally I have added a short edit at the first post of some older Threads of mine, for example to point at the post which might be close to a simplified section / solution. But in doing that I think it is important to note that its often regarded as good posting practice not to edit any post too much , once the post has replies, so as not to make following posts appear a bit out of sync with the general run of the Thread.
_.____
But you keep the long posts going, Chris. Down with the short message mentality and post size limit I say :) . Just my opinion ;) , that’s all :)

Alan

[ChrisGreaves]

... a system whereby the initiator of a long thread might accept responsibility to build a single post with one, or two, levels:-

Proposal to Summarize Long Threads
I am summarizing my replies to posts in this thread to date as I did in this post. I see this as a way of reducing the number of posts in a thread and bringing the status of the thread to a convergent point. Just another way of summarizing data.

Chris> … the initiator of a long thread might accept responsibility to build a single post with one, or two, levels. I’d appreciate hearing comments and suggestions as to how we might adopt this suggestion in a semi-formal manner.

In my post I suggested “accept responsibility”, with no compulsion. I did ask for comments and suggestions and am grateful for these. As well I suggested a semi-formal manner; that is, that there might be a recommended structure (of summaries) for anyone inclined to generate a summary,.

Argus> Good luck with that; some, ahem, can't decide which solution to use, if any. [Before reading past the first few sentences] OK, when you have read the 9 pages and done what you propose above. I think the lounge is too small for this level of sophistication.

Quite so. In many a long thread there are branches of thought, some profitable, some not so much. Each new reader coming across the thread must travel each branch and discover it to be (possibly) a dead-end or fruitless path. As for level of sophistication, if it was good enough for Rudi, it’s good enough for me,

HansV> I agree with Argus - this is not going to happen.

But it has happened in the past. Here I am suggesting that a few guidelines might help users in summarizing threads.

jstevens (John)> Out of curiosity, which thread has the most pages?

Good question, and “pages” or “posts” or even “screens” all serve as valid units of measurement, but they do not eliminate the “fluff” in all its various forms. Whether a thread is 50% images (blows up the number of pages) or 50% hijacking banter (blows up the number of posts), or what, a one-post summary of the technique that seems to be generally acceptable as a solution is the best bet.

HansV> @jstevens: the topic (thread) with the highest number of replies is Xmas Word Association Game from 202, with 555 replies. #2 is Best FREE Software (Used and Rated by Loungers) with 327 replies. I wouldn't like to summarize either!

Me either! But there again, providing a single post that short-circuits all the fluff/dead-ends is surely a valuable post, and whether we/I like it or not, it is surely valuable work.

John Gray> Chris: surely the solution is for you to write many fewer words...? (I always think that you are unnecessarily prolix!)

Fewer words would help, but then I sometimes add detail for the future reader, or novice, who may not yet be up on the jargon. I was once mystified by RC and IMNSHO.. And yes, I am prolix, and do write “a lot”, but I love writing, and it’s hard being a lonely old man living on top of a hill on a wind-swept peninsula, miles from civilization and … (see what I mean?!!)

Doc.AElstein (Alan)> I think your idea Chris is basically sound. But my 2 cents is that the amount of Threads appropriate for such treatment is relatively too small to warrant a formal or even semi formal approach. I think maybe the odd occasion that something like you suggest could be useful to do, somebody doing it without a formal set of guidelines on doing it is OK. Down with the short message mentality and post size limit I say :) . Just my opinion ;) , that’s all :)

It is not the amount/number of threads that matters. When I/we come across a long thread, multiple pages, that we need to wade through to find the nugget, why not then post the nugget as a summary? It should save the next person(s) wading through the mire. And yes, doing it without guidelines is OK (and legal and admirable), but if someone does suggest a guideline, why not work with that existing standard? I must confess that some longer comments give me food for thought and often enough remind me that I am human.

Cheers
Chris

[Rebel]

Would this be an acceptable summary for this thread regarding a "Proposal to Summarize Long Threads":

I agree with Argus - this is not going to happen.

[Doc.AElstein]

....I must confess that some longer comments give me food for thought and often enough remind me that I am human.

An interesting timely comment…. I was asked just recently to help track down a possible comment/question posting Bot , or one that someone is trying to develop, that is doing some awkward damage… The problem is that some of the short replies are very believable, but a longer reply attempt is usually more revealing…
We believe the learning algorithm of this Bot is getting its food from the current mass of forum short questions and short answers.
Its quite frightening.

[PJ_in_FL]

Would this be an acceptable summary for this thread regarding a "Proposal to Summarize Long Threads":

I agree with Argus - this is not going to happen.

I second that!

[viking33]

Chris, I think your last post is similar to the thread itself, that you mention ....too long!

[ChrisGreaves]

Chris, I think your last post is similar to the thread itself, that you mention ....too long!

Hi Bob. Yes, the summary is a long post, but look at it as a single post completely (I hope accurately) summarizing something, instead of the same material spread over seven or eight individual posts from the same person responding to seven or eight other people.

In this summary I was trying to set down my thoughts after a couple of days careful consideration of responses. In that sense I think it is a good summary.

The summary proposed for the thread started on January 11th 2011 might end up the same length as this summary (above) BUT it would condense nine pages into a screen. And it should eliminate dead-ends and the like. A net saving for whoever comes across the thread in future.

The fact that no-one (including me) wants to summarize nine pages suggests that no-one wants to, or will, read the thread in the future.

A forum with threads that pop up in searches but "can't be read" is not a useful as it might be.

Cheers
Chris

[Argus]

I agree with you there, Chris.

A first small step, that just about every forum I've encountered often lack, is feedback from the OP. I.e. did suggested solutions work. We often see that here, which is great and obviously more often seen in smaller forums.

We also have very kind and tolerant administrators,* at other places moderators might step into a thread and urge people to stay on topic.

I've no problem with long posts if they are a genuine attempt to help from one user to another. (There can also be fifty-elven lines of code in an office file, most people don't see, and just a short reply: "check this file".)

(BTW, xkcd suggests a sticky-post for the people of the future ... :))

* Do I get a cookie now?

[PJ_in_FL]

Chris, I think your last post is similar to the thread itself, that you mention ....too long!

Hi Bob. Yes, the summary is a long post, but look at it as a single post completely (I hope accurately) summarizing something, instead of the same material spread over seven or eight individual posts from the same person responding to seven or eight other people.

...

Cheers
Chris

But Chris, soon it will devolve into discussions of who is summarizing and what they're are leaving out due to any supposed biases. We DO NOT want to go there!!!!

[GeoffW]

Being winter Down Under, I'd be happy for somebody to summerize.

[John Gray]

Chris: have you ever thought of summarising what you post before you post it, rather than after?
During English lessons at skool we often had to précis pieces of text to extract the salient points therefrom in a more-condensed form...

[DaveA]

Now, I think that Chris is looking for something to do.
He can spend his time Summarizing the Lonnnnng posts during the cold Canadian winters.
I think he just may be the person to do it!