Thread seen as a discussion (changes structure of topic)

[completelayman]

I search for modification who changes setting the posts in the topic/thread.
Show them like discussion.
Like this:



Topic would have posibility "reply to the topic" and post will have "reply to the post".
"Quote to the post" or "reply to the post" will started new discussion (in paragraph, under the post which person quotes or reply).

Here is for example couple of boards who have similar solutions:



or..



SMF source code allows do something like that ??

IF this is unreal
maybe there is an extension/modyfication that add a list like this:



The table inside the topic above the main theme, on all subpage of topic.

[margarett]

That's called "threaded view" and no, there is no such thing in SMF...

[completelayman]

thanks, thanks very thanks
ok this is sad news but I know what it called and now I can searching it

Meybe know where find this option?
phpBB and myBB dont have this.
Meybe WordPress, Drupal or joomla have this option?
or something else.

[Kindred]

The reason that neither SMF nor the other systems do not have this method of thread display is because it is an outdated form of communication that actually discourages conversation and is a pain in the butt to code into the database correctly (and uses many more resources)

[completelayman]

Maybe but...

Having a threaded view is actually very useful once you've tried it. For example:

- it helps separate the different "conversations" or sub-conversations within a topic or thread.

- It's nice to see what replies go back to what parent post without blocks of "quoted from..." text. Very easy to see who someone was replying to without having to reference the originating post.

- It's nice because it allows you to easily ignore sub-threads that go off on a tangent that you have no interest in.

- it helps group any sub-discussions that occur within a topic. Sometimes 'Clown A' and 'Clown B' will get into a squabble or crapfest amongst themselves...in a threaded view you can simply ignore that branch of the thread-tree without having to scroll by all of their nonsense, looking at every post to see if it's them or not. That is, instead of their stuff being mixed in linearly with all the real posts, it's kept nicely segregated in its own little branch.

And what I want this modyfication so much.

This really works fine but in .. hxxp:wykop.pl [nonactive] or hxxp:filmweb.pl/forum [nonactive]
and must be visible all reply to looked nice (like in my examples on first post).

[Kindred]

I happen to disagree with every statement made in that quote.

it helps to separate conversations so that they become between only two people and discourages anyone else from entering the conversation.

quoted from is the easiest and best way to respond to a person's specific points.
On the other hand, it is fairly obvious what I am responding to here, even without the quoted from or threaded view...

sub threads/off-topic can be separated by any moderator if they truly form a distraction.... however, I happen to think that the organic nature of a true conversation if carried in the flat view rather than threaded view.

mhe. just meh.

[completelayman]

I understand your opinion but I think this will be good for me.

I see drupal have forum with this option so meybe worth checking it.

[Steve]

Interesting that Kindred said 'it is an outdated form of communication' and you come back with a 3 year old quote.

At any rate, obviously SMF isn't going to have that ability as it goes against their ideas and visions of what forum software should do.

[Night09]

Well as 'outdated' as it may come across its used on the biggest video site on the net..you-tube..

It is actually easier to scroll through crap using it than having to read everything.

[Suki]

Well as 'outdated' as it may come across its used on the biggest video site on the net..you-tube..

To fit and accommodate google's (IMO) terrible decision to merge google+ and youtube comments...  which BTW had some nasty responses when it was so abruptly introduced but, oh well, it is google, google says, user do...

Oh and its not truly a "threaded view", its more like getting all scattered conversations about a video and put them together in a single place, AFAIK those multiple conversations has little to no interactions with each other.

It is actually easier to scroll through crap using it than having to read everything.

Right until what you really want to respond to is actually buried 2 or 3 levels down that same crap which means you actually need to read all that crap anyway

[Kindred]

More importantly,  YouTube is not a forum.  Comments on a video are not conversations. .. so your comparison is apples versus coconuts, and is not a valid argument

[Bloc]

Well, more like red and green apples then.."comments" are as much a discussion as any "topic".

If I write a first post about a movie, and people discuss further that movie or what I wrote - how is that any different than commenting on a blog post about a movie? The difference is that "comments" are usualy toned down in style/appearence, while the first is highlighted. The first post is also usually shown on every page of the comments. (which isn't such a bad idea, it promotes the discussion to stay "on-topic")

Comments on the youtube style is easer to read, because you can jump down. In a topic, especially if it goes off-topic, you have to read each and every one of the posts, and not be able to juggle past any off-topic things.

[Suki]

We aren't discussing youtube's comment system... youtube does not use threaded view, but, oh well, here we go...

There isn't any connection between each "first post" (they can be from either youtube, google+ profile or any other google related service) and there isn't a third or fourth level of comments either.

You can reply to any of them because google forced you to use your google account on youtube.

If you want that on SMF then grab a board and display all its topics with their replies on a single page, it can be done, its ugly, but it can be done.


So no, the youtube style does not apply here and doesn't count  as a "threaded view" example.

[Arantor]

And invariably you get a horrible UI mess - a la Reddit or HN.

[Bloc]

And invariably you get a horrible UI mess - a la Reddit or HN.

Reddit is bad to read, true - but that does not mean that the idea of compartmentalizing pieces of a discussion is wrong in itself. Having 1 or maybe 2 levels would help a lot, and at the same time not be a nightmare to follow/fetch. The queries need to be changed, but not so much as a true thread view would require. The code would need to fetch the base level (which would be the same amount of replies as normal view but adding x amount of replies to each of them, if they exists. Fetching beyond x replies should/could be be done dynamically) which in itself could be enough to follow a discussion better. If you wanted to see any sidetracks, you press "more" to get them.(or they could for example have just the 3 latest replies shown already, with an extra "more" link)

The more I think about it, the more I want it lol. (but I guess no-one will actually DO that to SMF so I guess its mod material for me then)

[Bloc]

I happen to disagree with every statement made in that quote.

it helps to separate conversations so that they become between only two people and discourages anyone else from entering the conversation.

quoted from is the easiest and best way to respond to a person's specific points.
On the other hand, it is fairly obvious what I am responding to here, even without the quoted from or threaded view...

sub threads/off-topic can be separated by any moderator if they truly form a distraction.... however, I happen to think that the organic nature of a true conversation if carried in the flat view rather than threaded view.

mhe. just meh.

To elaborate on this..in a room full of people, how do you expect discussions to be conducted there?

a) ONE speaker, any comments to that would need to be adressed one-by-one, and only one can speak at a time = topic with possible quotes.(no unlike a blog post actually)

b) Several people form groups and discuss the overall topic into smaller ones - after the first speaker is done, presumably, then people mingle between subdiscussions = thread view with possible just 1 or 2 levels deep.

Of course neither is really accurate for topic discussions or RL meetings..but both methods are very "natural".

[Steve]

A forum isn't a room full of people. It's nature is completely different so I don't see how a comparison can be made.

[Arantor]

Actually it is - just not everyone chooses to speak all at once.

[Steve]

Depends on your point of view then I guess.

[Kindred]

Actually...  that's not a bad comparison.

A forum is like a crowded room where everyone is talking.
However, each thread is like a separate conversation "bubble"...   and like an actual conversation, quite often, the discussion is "organic". It grows and shifts a bit as it continues - sometimes moving to other topics before coming back or being related to the original topic of the discussion...

"threaded view" attempts to artificially FORCE the discussion into more and more individual "bubbles" thus preventing the true communication from being an actual conversation and actually making it difficult for someone to join the discussion - instead being shunted off into one of the separate "bubbles".


bascially, threaded view prevents real communication.