Discussion on Investor thread configuration

[c041v]

OK folks, we've taken some feedback (thanks to those who PM'd or posted) and Robert and I have discussed so here's a suggested scenario:

1. Close the Short-Term TSLA thread and the Chit-Chat thread.

2. Create new threads as follows:

• Live reporting/commentary/news/hour-by-hour movements
• Sharing joy/disaster/swings and roundabouts
• Analysis, Charts and Tactics

3. Allow individual "guru' threads for the so-called mega posts which are:

• For established members but open to discussion for everyone
• Approved by Moderators (Nobody wants to see 100 different threads)
• E.g DaveT, Citizen-T, Sleepyhead, CapOp
• Moderators will step in if they start to go too far off the rails

4. Sticky the threads in point 2. above plus Long-Term Fundamentals.

5. Sticky the latest "quarterly" thread as we do with FW versions in the User Interface section.

As with all solutions this does require self-discipline from our members but we figure that it's manageable from a moderator viewpoint..

We know that we'll never make everyone happy but this is your chance to comment and tell us if you like the idea(s).

Thoughts?

Does this go to a vote? I like this proposed layout.

I also think the Options trading threads should be stickied as they will likely endure for years to come. Would be great (if it's not too much work) to have some summaries at the start of those threads that compile the links and various info letting users know what to expect from each thread. For example, the newbie thread should have some Options basics, whereas the Advanced thread should clearly indicate that you shouldn't be posting unless you are familiar with Condors, Delay Constructs, etc.

I think that would make those threads easier to navigate as we get new users, who will inevitably be asking the questions that have already been answered dozens of times.

 

[Norse]

OK folks, we've taken some feedback (thanks to those who PM'd or posted) and Robert and I have discussed so here's a suggested scenario:

1. Close the Short-Term TSLA thread and the Chit-Chat thread.

2. Create new threads as follows:

• Live reporting/commentary/news/hour-by-hour movements
• Sharing joy/disaster/swings and roundabouts
• Analysis, Charts and Tactics

3. Allow individual "guru' threads for the so-called mega posts which are:

• For established members but open to discussion for everyone
• Approved by Moderators (Nobody wants to see 100 different threads)
• E.g DaveT, Citizen-T, Sleepyhead, CapOp
• Moderators will step in if they start to go too far off the rails

4. Sticky the threads in point 2. above plus Long-Term Fundamentals.

5. Sticky the latest "quarterly" thread as we do with FW versions in the User Interface section.

As with all solutions this does require self-discipline from our members but we figure that it's manageable from a moderator viewpoint..

We know that we'll never make everyone happy but this is your chance to comment and tell us if you like the idea(s).

Thoughts?

I like it!!

 

[NigelM]

Weird. I was seeing it as quite the opposite (the original post creating more work, and coming across as "censoring" sometimes). But whatever works I guess.

Generally, mods read the posts and we only step in when something goes out of bounds or off topic. I can see where your suggestion was coming from, but that would have required mods to start moving posts and adding links on a more frequent basis, therefore more workload.

(I know you weren't implying but just FTR mods try really, really hard never to censor anything so long as it stays within the ToS).

I like the idea. So Dave T., Sleepy have threads started like the one titled 'Julian Cox on TM".....

Exactly.

I also think the Options trading threads should be stickied as they will likely endure for years to come. Would be great (if it's not too much work) to have some summaries at the start of those threads that compile the links and various info letting users know what to expect from each thread. For example, the newbie thread should have some Options basics, whereas the Advanced thread should clearly indicate that you shouldn't be posting unless you are familiar with Condors, Delay Constructs, etc.

If this is a widespread wish we could add a Wiki post to the beginning of those threads and then have members keep them updated. E.g the Model X Tally thread.

 

[v12 to 12v]

Would the chit chat about things like, "I bought this, and I sold that and I made/lost this much money" be going into the "Joy Sharing" thread?

That is one of the topics that made the Short Term Movements thread tough to follow. I gave up for a while. I interpreted the intent of the Short Term thread to be more for news, events, insights, rumors and develoments that may or may not influence the stock in the immediate past or future.

 

[NigelM]

Would the chit chat about things like, "I bought this, and I sold that and I made/lost this much money" be going into the "Joy Sharing" thread?

Yes.

That is one of the topics that made the Short Term Movements thread tough to follow. I gave up for a while. I interpreted the intent of the Short Term thread to be more for news, events, insights, rumors and develoments that may or may not influence the stock in the immediate past or future.

Agree. That's why we'd like a better (read: more descriptive) way to separate the news from the joy sharing.

 

[FluxCap]

Nigel, I really like this direction you and Robert have come up with in general. However, I have a couple suggestions:

1) I would recommend that you try to "laser in" on the subject matter that you feel is appropriate for each of the new threads without listing so many, because I think forum participants might get confused. I'm not exactly certain how this shakes out, but I think you could cut down on the descriptors to one or two if you try. I like the direction, though I worry that despite your efforts to set things up this way, the influx of newer users will not comply with limiting subject matter, and this could result in either A) frustration on the part of veterans and users who do not wish to see "noise" and B) an excess of demands on the time of moderators to "scrub" the threads and police users. I don't think either is ideal, but I'm confident you gentlemen can come up with a workable solution. I just hope you don't have to work too terribly hard to keep this forum relevant and useful.

2) In the ancient days of BBS'es (the precursor to web-based discussion forums on the internet), we had something called SecLevels. Basically, there were ranks of membership beyond the binary "moderator and moderated." I wonder if it is feasible to introduce a "guru" level of forum membership that must be vetted by moderators and then approved. This enables all sorts of logical groupings of discussion. For example, you could have an "approved gurus" Short-term thread in which only approved gurus could post and chat with each other (essentially like analyst-to-analyst debate), but that any forum member could read. This would serve the purpose of limiting noise in the discussion as well as being an easily-accessible place to view the very valuable analysis of key forum members here that most of the users here want to see. Criteria for "guru" membership would necessarily be somewhat subjective, but I have seen this work in action, and it does indeed work. It elevates the quality of dialogue when implemented correctly.

Edit: In reviewing your proposed thread headers, I think "Analysis, Charts and Tactics" is a perfect candidate for "guru" level posting. Restricting posting but not viewing could create some awesome results. Just an idea.

Just a couple ideas / food for thought. Thanks for all your continued hard work.

 

[Citizen-T]

I like it.

I think closing the existing threads is the only way we are going to drive change. Members need to help the moderators out here and teach the newcomers which thread their comments belong in.

 

[DaveT]

• Live reporting/commentary/news/hour-by-hour movements
• Sharing joy/disaster/swings and roundabouts
• Analysis, Charts and Tactics

I have my doubts about splitting things up to three separate threads. Seems to add complexity. And the proposed thread names are confusing (to me).

 

[mershaw2001]

I have my doubts about splitting things up to three separate threads. Seems to add complexity. And the proposed thread names are confusing (to me).

I'm getting a little frustrated clicking on 15 different threads that all contain similar posts (how much dif is advanced options from basic options from the options talk that was in the short term thread? ) and on a phone it takes forever to go through all the new threads. I have to toss my vote in for making fewer different threads unless they truly have a different topic.

 

[NigelM]

I have my doubts about splitting things up to three separate threads. Seems to add complexity. And the proposed thread names are confusing (to me).

I'm getting a little frustrated clicking on 15 different threads that all contain similar posts (how much dif is advanced options from basic options from the options talk that was in the short term thread? ) and on a phone it takes forever to go through all the new threads. I have to toss my vote in for making fewer different threads unless they truly have a different topic.

The primary issue right now is things getting lost in the unwieldy "Short Term Movements" thread where we hundreds of posts a day, to the extent that folks are saying they stopped reading/participating completely.

My takeaway from your feedback is that we also need really clear thread titles to act as signposts.

 

[kenliles]

I really like the proposed direction in general. I'm also in agreement with DaveT that if we go that number of splits- make the names more concisely descriptive. Otherwise, I vote yes, then tweak on it from there;
good work guys

 

[NigelM]

I'm going to give some thought to thread titles over the weekend....feel free to make suggestions here on on PM. Thanks.

 

[CyberDutchie]

I'm going to give some thought to thread titles over the weekend....feel free to make suggestions here on on PM. Thanks.

Not sure if it matters, the Short Term Investor Price Movement tread seems to have come to a grinding halt. No new post in 48 hours, that's unheard of. Where did everyone go??

 

[sub]

it has slowed down a bit in general, I think due to the issues mentioned in this thread I've noticed the mix of posters has changed, which is ok. however, it is a weekend and that thread always slows way down because well, it's the short term thread and the stock doesn't move much on the weekends.

 

[sp4rk]

[Moderator: following 8 posts moved here from Articles-megaposts-by-DaveT]


Are you saying the mods GAVE you permission, or you are doing it contingent on their permission?

Your thread, Articles/megaposts by DaveT, doesn't even include TSLA. Confusing? The mods try as hard as they can to make these forums organized but, I'm sorry, this doesn't help!

Mods, please move this to where it belongs in the TSLA thread? Thanks ... nothing personal DaveT

 

[hershey101]

Are you saying the mods GAVE you permission, or you are doing it contingent on their permission?

Your thread, Articles/megaposts by DaveT, doesn't even include TSLA. Confusing? The mods try as hard as they can to make these forums organized but, I'm sorry, this doesn't help!

Mods, please move this to where it belongs in the TSLA thread? Thanks ... nothing personal DaveT

I understand what you mean, but I don't think the mods should move this thread elsewhere..
Doing things like that, and the whole thing with kevin99's signature is going to cause some of the greatest contributors to leave this website, not immediately, but definitely at some point in the future. And that won't be good for anyone.

 

[DaveT]

Are you saying the mods GAVE you permission, or you are doing it contingent on their permission?

"With permission of the moderators" means that moderators gave me permission.

 

[MikeC]

Why shouldn't DaveT have his own thread? This was an excellent megapost. He is clearly discussing TSLA and it is in the TSLA subforum.

 

[Norse]

Are you saying the mods GAVE you permission, or you are doing it contingent on their permission?

Your thread, Articles/megaposts by DaveT, doesn't even include TSLA. Confusing? The mods try as hard as they can to make these forums organized but, I'm sorry, this doesn't help!

Mods, please move this to where it belongs in the TSLA thread? Thanks ... nothing personal DaveT

Posts like this is what is ruining this sub-forum. People like DaveT, sleepy and lotsa other are doing the work for all the others, and this is what they get in return.

And to DaveT, thank you for a great post, I myself am pretty sure they will have good guidance, tho I think they will lowball it

 

[sp4rk]

Why shouldn't DaveT have his own thread? This was an excellent megapost. He is clearly discussing TSLA and it is in the TSLA subforum.

Not discussing the quality of the post, just its location, without a thread title that describes it.
The only issue I have with TMC is a whole is finding stuff later on ...