What do you want to happen to "fast threads"?

[Chippiewill]

Actually only 41/103 people wanted them to stay outright. In reality the vote against the threads was split. Therefore the vote was inconclusive though it does seem to imply primarily moving them to spam. However without full voting data it is impossible to tell.

[MKR&*42]

Well everyone who said "move them to..." or "let them continue" must have felt they had something to add to the forum and weren't entirely pointless. So all those added together = 107 and the final two combined = 61.

It would have been much better with a simple "keep them" or "get rid of them" poll because then you couldn't really argue over what the best thing to do is.

[Chippiewill]

Well everyone who said "move them to..." or "let them continue" must have felt they had something to add to the forum and weren't entirely pointless. So all those added together = 107 and the final two combined = 61.

It would have been much better with a simple "keep them" or "get rid of them" poll because then you couldn't really argue over what the best thing to do is.

Yeah.. adding them together won't work.

[Chippiewill]

Matt's given me some additional data on who voted what so I can do some better analysis on this. Twenty-nine people voted for "Don't change anything and let them continue" and did not vote for anything else. Since only 40% voted with that intention we can take the natural step of eliminating that as a viable option.

When those 29 people are added to the least controversial alternative (aka their likely voting intention if they could not vote to keep them), sub-forum with post count ENABLED, it leaves that as 61 people or 59% happiest (When a change is required) with the threads moved to a sub-forum with post count enabled.

The cross section of removing them altogether, moving them to spam or sub-forum by themselves is too similar for any of those to be a viable alternative over sub-forum with post count enabled.

The natural conclusion here would be to declare sub-forum with post count enabled as the victor. The real loser here is the FPTP system which is clearly demonstrated as unworkable. Clearly Habbox needs to move to a STV system.

[AgnesIO]

Actually only 41/103 people wanted them to stay outright. In reality the vote against the threads was split. Therefore the vote was inconclusive though it does seem to imply primarily moving them to spam. However without full voting data it is impossible to tell.

Correct

"Don't change anything and let them continue" mhmm, the users voted

Little bit of logic goes a long way, kid.

The poll has now closed and results are in. The one with the most votes is:

"Don't change anything and let them continue"

I assume you are not actually going with that?

Don't change anything and let them continue; 41 votes
Move them to a sub-forum either with or without post count enabled; 66

The next stage should be a poll for a EITHER post count enabled or disabled sub forum, as evidently the most popular option is for them to be moved? :S

[Chippiewill]

Don't change anything and let them continue; 41 votes
Move them to a sub-forum either with or without post count enabled; 66

The next stage should be a poll for a EITHER post count enabled or disabled sub forum, as evidently the most popular option is for them to be moved? :S

False. You CANNOT add the sub-forum totals together. The number of people who voted for either was too high. Having looked at who individually voted for what it HEAVILY implies that post count with post count enabled is favoured by far.

[MKR&*42]

Yeah.. adding them together won't work.

As a question to your post below, how did only 29 people vote for don't change anything when the poll results say 41? Am I missing something?

[AgnesIO]

False. You CANNOT add the sub-forum totals together. The number of people who voted for either was too high. Having looked at who individually voted for what it HEAVILY implies that post count with post count enabled is favoured by far.

But 62 INDIVIDUAL people MUST have picked one of the top four - which all ask for them to NOT stay as they are.

[Chippiewill]

As a question to your post below, how did only 29 people vote for don't change anything when the poll results say 41? Am I missing something?

29 of those 41 voted for JUST 'Stay as they are' and nothing else, therefore if it is eliminated as an option their votes would *normally* be lost. HOWEVER, I made the assumption (A fairly good one) that if they had to pick something else that they'd pick sub-forum with post count enabled. Therefore I essentially did a naughty AV vote and moved their votes to sub-forum with post count enabled which lands it with 61 people who would like it as an option.

But 62 INDIVIDUAL people MUST have picked one of the top four - which all ask for them to NOT stay as they are.

Yes, and looking at the data most people would have voted for sub forum with post count enabled if they could not have it stay as is.

[Mr-Trainor]

That doesn't change the fact that "Don't change anything and let them continue" was the most popular option, as it received the most votes. Like I've said already, I really don't think anything needs to be done anyway and so I'm not really surprised that that was the option which received the most votes. There are already rules in place to deal with threads have no point and that really need to be dealt with, not to mention the problems with differentiating between a 'fast' thread and a 'normal' thread because of a difference of opinion which could cause arguments. So yeah, I still stand by my vote that nothing big like a sub forum needs to be done.