There is no way to rename an existing thread that I know of. To do that the entire thread would have to be reposted. The only time thread should be moved is when they are in direct coorelation to the thread they are moved to  and they shouldn't be moved except when caught early. That's my opinion and you know I'm just one manager.

 

When threads are combined, as I said above, they should be done in a manner to keep the flow going relevant to the thread with which they are combined. What happens is they get muddled by back and forths and the whole train of thought is lost. When responding to a particular post the post should be noted in the response for a point of reference. Again this is my own opinion and as such carries only my weight as an individual manager.

 

The goal of merging threads is to keep as many separate topics on the board as possible. If there are ten threads on virtually the same subject it knocks other threads off of the board. Many people do not take the time to look back on the previous page to find what they are looking for and simply post another thread on the same subject thus knocking someone else down and it gets to the point where everyone keeps repeating themselves.

 

Before you get defensive and say that the Obama and Hillary threads are all on the same subject of Obama or Hillary, let me say this, those threads are usually on different points and perspective of different issues involving each. Most of the threads on NO are saying the same thing about "the unfairness of it all" that you see.

 

i understand, dduct, but i think that other managers are using this procedure, as a tactic.  i am in favor of merging threads when it makes sense, but i am absolutely opposed to the mindless and tactical (rather than utile) way it has been done so far.

 

i feel that my ideas have been absolutely assaulted, using this procedure as an excuse.

 

but, i do think you understand the nature of my suggestions - i am concerned about the flow of ideas.