Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6698756" data-attributes="member: 92511">I think that may be too...&quot;cluttered&quot;, I guess. You will start to see comments being left only to be told &quot;Well this is the Optimization forum, so we don't care about that&quot; type posts. Or, maybe, someone will come to Meta now to ask why all of these &quot;other&quot; threads are in the 5e forum. But an interesting and creative compromise that should prove enlightening, I'm sure. I feel fairly confident that it will bare out that Agamon and myself are not the &quot;only two&quot; people who share our view here and, in fact, out preference will outnumber the one voice calling for merging by a significant margin. The threads, almost certainly, will see an increase in views. More than one place to click on them is going to effect traffic. But will that, necessarily, translate into longer threads/more comments? I really don't think, necessarily, so. Should be interesting to hear how it goes, if you'd care to share the data after some time to observe, Morrus.I will grant it is entirely possible that myself and Agamon might be the only two who do a casual pass of the Meta forum from time to time to see if there are any large[r] issues happening we should be aware of. hahaha..and in this case, especially, I'm very glad I did and I'll stand by my preference for &quot;it's better this way.&quot;As you say, Morrus, there are more threads now than there were before the split. That's great! It's doing exactly what it should (and presumably you wanted. Get more folks making posts.). People will learn about/find/look at it as they do and, if they are interested in that element of the game, I am certain given time traffic there will increase.&nbsp;There are, of course, always other theories for reasons why certain threads might not get a significant number of views or comments. I can think of at least three off the top of my head.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6698756, member: 92511"] I think that may be too..."cluttered", I guess. You will start to see comments being left only to be told "Well this is the Optimization forum, so we don't care about that" type posts. Or, maybe, someone will come to Meta now to ask why all of these "other" threads are in the 5e forum. But an interesting and creative compromise that should prove enlightening, I'm sure. I feel fairly confident that it will bare out that Agamon and myself are not the "only two" people who share our view here and, in fact, out preference will outnumber the one voice calling for merging by a significant margin. The threads, almost certainly, will see an increase in views. More than one place to click on them is going to effect traffic. But will that, necessarily, translate into longer threads/more comments? I really don't think, necessarily, so. Should be interesting to hear how it goes, if you'd care to share the data after some time to observe, Morrus. I will grant it is entirely possible that myself and Agamon might be the only two who do a casual pass of the Meta forum from time to time to see if there are any large[r] issues happening we should be aware of. hahaha..and in this case, especially, I'm very glad I did and I'll stand by my preference for "it's better this way." As you say, Morrus, there are more threads now than there were before the split. That's great! It's doing exactly what it should (and presumably you wanted. Get more folks making posts.). People will learn about/find/look at it as they do and, if they are interested in that element of the game, I am certain given time traffic there will increase. There are, of course, always other theories for reasons why certain threads might not get a significant number of views or comments. I can think of at least three off the top of my head. [/QUOTE]

Verification