Status of Co-op Threads

A few people have expressed confusion about the threads that are listed when looking for new co-ops, and I've been asked to "close" my thread. My co-op isn't open, but there are loose ends to tie up and I don't want to close the thread until all actions have been completed. Can another status be added for co-ops that are still in progress but no longer open to new participants? Maybe for the trading forums also?

Thank you for posting this, Cheryl. Same boat here.

Also, is there a way to keep a thread visible on the home page, even if no new posts have been made? As with the coop forum, I would like to keep certain threads ready to read, even if I've read the most recent post, rather than having to hunt for it. This has been especially important now that I'm doing a coop.

Here's the thread about closing threads :-)
http://davesgarden.com/forums/t/678614/

This message was edited Dec 19, 2006 9:22 AM

I like that idea a lot! It might even be available as a setting on my home page, but if it is, I haven't found it.

It's like being able to mark our dmails as unread, so they still show on the home page. For me, out of sight, out of mind (or, I worry that I'll forget it, so it takes up too much brainspace, of which, some days, I have little to spare - or is it to work with at the outset?..lol).

I'll put in another vote for adding another status category to the co-op forum if that's possible... That would make it easier to distinguish between "Open" threads with new opportunities, "Working" threads for co-ops that are still ongoing but have been closed to new participants, and "Closed" threads that have concluded all their business.

Dave may be able to accomplish this - I don't know.

But if I may interject another thought here...when we participate in co-ops, it's up to each of us to put the pertinent threads on our individual "watch" lists to keep up with any news/updates or announcements from the organizer. And whoever starts a thread is automatically set to "watch" it unless they opt to remove it from their list.

Even if the thread is marked "closed", any new posts will still trigger a flag on our home pages and we stay abreast of any developments. Given that capability, it seems reasonable to just keep the two (closed or open) options on the co-op forum, instead of creating a third status (I can only guess that there are some technical difficulties with programming a third choice.)

Part of the problem is that there is some confusion about when a co-op thread should be marked "Closed."

The etiquette according to some is to mark threads "Closed" when a particular co-op is no longer accepting additional participants. To me, this makes it hard to distinguish between obsolete threads and those involving active co-ops where some business is still ongoing... and that in turn makes it more difficult to find the latest "continuation" thread for a co-op I'm interested in.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if co-op threads weren't marked "Closed" until the business of the co-op was concluded, as long as the first post clearly stated (preferably right at the top in bold letters) whether or not the co-op was closed to additional participants.

A third status category (if it turns out to be technically reasonable to add) would make things entirely clear, I think. It wouldn't have to be separately searchable, either... you could search "Active" co-ops ("Open" and "Working") vs "Inactive" ("Closed") co-ops, or whichever combination seems reasonable.

:-)
Oh, I bet Dave can do anything with computers! :-)
But I don't mind opening a thread if it is clearly posted Closed to new members at the top. I get aggravated when I go through the thread, on and on, and think, finally, at the end, it is still open, only to find it closed fifteen posts prior, or after I ask - can I still get in? (hopefully, innocently)

Actually, I've opted to not join coops that didn't have important information posted in the first couple of posts, as it all gets too confusing for me. I like have one place to refer to for rules and changes. :-) That little guideline seems to have saved me a bunch of grief ...:-)

OK,
Just saw this thread and since I started it, let me add this.
When multiple threads are started by every member who chooses to start one, let use the recent TNN as an example, there are constant comments going on keeping these threads on the front page. A new co-op thread could get buried very quickly as you can only view a limited number of threads on each page. Take a look at say page 2 when viewing only "open" threads. How many of these need to remain "open"?

http://davesgarden.com/forums/f/groupbuy/unsolved/20

The same with page 1. Look at the last post date on the right column. Do threads with not activity since say September and earlier really need to remain open?




This message was edited Dec 19, 2006 8:57 PM

You're absolutely correct on that point! :-)