Posted by Rick on July 1, 2001, at 1:31:09
In reply to Re: post gets archived the next morning, posted by Dr. Bob on June 30, 2001, at 17:39:12
Thanks for the response. I had a feeling there might be some tricky technical issues I was overlooking.
> > the people most likely to read my shunted-to-archive posts are probably lurkers (aka "Psycho-Dabblers") who are less likely to respond.
>
> Well, I don't know, why would you assume that?
>"Lurkers" wasn't really the right word. I was referring more to first-time or sporadic users. They're the folks who are more likely to be "looking around" and browsing the archives, don't you think? Conversely, A more-frequent reader/contributor might feel they haven't missed anything in say, 24 hours when in fact they have.
"Out of sight, out of mind" still applies when the only visual enticement to click isn't any sexier than "01 June 18" at the bottom of a laundry list of archive start-dates. And if someone sees a homepage already brimming with interesting topics, they're more likely to dive into those and overlook -- or have little time left to spend with -- the archives.How about implementing an interim fix which simply draws attention to the last archive. A simple approach could be to set the latest archive's link apart form the rest (i.e., lower down and maybe bigger font); give it start AND end dates; and add a large-font note, with an arrow pointing to that link, saying something like "Regular Readers remember to check here for late posts from last period." And change "Current Period" to "Current Period -- Starting with posts from 6/25/01." Etc., etc, with wordsmithing.
>(But if you just post it again to start a new thread, I might not notice. :-)
It's really nice that you're so open and honest with me. A grievous error in judgment, but nice. ;-)
poster:Rick
thread:1523
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20010315/msgs/1526.html