# Splitting threads



## Alxmrphi

A regular thing that happens to me and I think I must be unlucky, is that I will reply to a thread, and then it will be moved while I am writing it and appended onto another thread and my thread is lost.

It has _just_ happened again in IE in this thead, and I went to UCP to see if it had recognised that I made a post in the thread but when I followed it up, the post above mine is there but not mine.

Can we introduce a policy whereby when a moderator wants to split a thread, they first hide it for 5 mins and then move it, then it should almost eliminate all the times this happens, if a thread isn't visible nobody would be replying to it and thus have their posts lost.

I wonder if I can find it, I'll go do a forum search.
[Edit] No matches found.

I did post it, I saw it, and my UCP recognises I did post it, so why when it was moved did it not appear in the other thread, this is about the 5th time this has happened, lol I am so unlucky.

Anyway, what is the general consensus on my idea?


----------



## TrentinaNE

Alex, often I close a thread while I'm splitting it, but if someone happens to be in the process of typing a response at the same moment that I close, I believe they'll experience the same problem you just did. I believe the same thing would result if you were in the process of typing at the moment that I "hid" the thread. Given the volume of actions that moderators have to take, I'm not sure this situation is completely avoidable. 

Elisabetta


----------



## Alxmrphi

I understand, but what I was confused about is my post wouldn't have, well, been registered as posted if the thread was closed, but it was registered. This is what confused me about why it didn't, go to the other thread, if you get what I mean.

Would it do the same even if you 'hid' the thread though? I imagined that it wouldn't, hmmm.


----------



## Jana337

Hiding a thread is likely to produce a lot of "where's the thread" requests. And technically, it wouldn't really help: Someone might have clicked on the thread before moderators start messing with it, and if you want to post a well-researched reply, you can easily need more than 5 minutes.

However, I don't understand why that happened. When I split a thread and 

forero A is replying to the original thread without quoting a post I am about to move, his post will remain in the thread,
forero B is replying to the orignal thread and quoting a post to be moved, the post will appear in the new thread as well.


----------



## Alxmrphi

If it didn't post then it wouldn't automatically subscribe me to the thread though, right? But it did subscribe me but didn't get moved, I am just wondering what happened and what's the easiest way to get around the problem of this happening, as the forums get more traffic it will become much more likely to happen.

I might go look and see if similar forums have this as well


----------



## Jana337

Alex_Murphy said:


> If it didn't post then it wouldn't automatically subscribe me to the thread though, right? But it did subscribe me but didn't get moved, I am just wondering what happened and what's the easiest way to get around the problem of this happening, as the forums get more traffic it will become much more likely to happen.
> 
> I might go look and see if similar forums have this as well


I am not surprised that you got subscribed. When you post somewhere and I delete it, you will remain subscribed. The moderator intervention obliterated your post in a way equivalent to deletion.

But are you sure that this happens frequently? Server hiccups can happen but not systematically. You will lose your post when I delete a thread in the meantime but you shouldn't normally lose it when I move some posts somewhere.


----------



## Alxmrphi

It seems when a new thread is there and I reply a mod usually moves it at the same time, I wouldn't say it happens frequently, well it depends, usually I am picky with what threads I reply to, but sometimes on IE when the activity is pretty high and a lot of new threads are appearing, when I reply to those ones, usually within 5-10 mins of it being opened, (when I presume if there is something wrong with it a mod will move it) when I reply to them in that sort of timing that's when it usually happens.


----------



## Jana337

Alex_Murphy said:


> It seems when a new thread is there and I reply a mod usually moves it at the same time, I wouldn't say it happens frequently, well it depends, usually I am picky with what threads I reply to, but sometimes on IE when the activity is pretty high and a lot of new threads are appearing, when I reply to those ones, usually within 5-10 mins of it being opened, (when I presume if there is something wrong with it a mod will move it) when I reply to them in that sort of timing that's when it usually happens.


If you want me to understand this and to reply, please cut it into several sentences. I've read it three times and won't try again - my brain cannot cope with the series of when's.


----------



## Alxmrphi

It doesn't "frequently" happen to me.
The only time it happens is when there is a lot of activity on the forums.
When there is a lot of activity there are loads of new posts.
New posts usually means a high percentage will be modified/changed by the mods.
This happens usually between 5-10 mins of the thread being opened.
This is when I would usually post, after refreshing to see the new threads and then responding.
My thread disappearing problem usually happens when the threads I reply in are 5-10 mins old, in the same period of time that a moderator might split/hide/delete it.
This is why I believe it happens, and only at that time, as it is the most likely time a mod would modify it.

Tutto chiaro adesso?


----------

