Concatening posts same user on a thread

>I think the new message should be added to the end of my last
>post instead of creating a new separated box with avatar/stats.
If I understand your request, then I'd argue that it makes no sense.

For example, let's say you make a post, then there's a short discussion after that post (say four or five people reply). Then you make another post in reply to one of them, yet your reply will be concatenated to your first post, which means that your answer will be higher up than the post you're replying to. It doesn't scale either. The more posts there are, the worse of a mess the whole thing will be.

This would only work with an extensive framework of back links, but that kind of spaghetti thread is far from clear and easy to use as you suggest.

I don't know if it's a feature already present for vBulletin, I meaning concatenate only if I made a recent post. If another user make a post, my post will be placed below from that user.

The feature is called edit. Generally if you want to add something to your post, you'll want to do so before the time limit is reached, and you can edit it.

It's a feature that I've seen on other forums, like PsicoFXP (a spanish one) based too on vBulletin. A conversation could be sliced in two parts if anyone reply on that moment, but I think this option adds a more coherent and straightforward communication

I'm not talking about edit, but concatenate this post above if anyone doesn't make a reply in this precise moment.

Would be necessary to check the last post (same user) then update the last message, some modifications on the core.

I think you're saying that if someone double-posts, the two posts get merged together into one.

That is to say Edit can replace what I'm saying but there is another issue (using edit), if I make edit (not correcting a speech error or code tags, but adding more content) and the other user responds at that moment my new content will be remain above and supposedly answered but it isn't, also the user will not be notified.

I think you're saying that if someone double-posts, the two posts get merged together into one.

That's what I trying to say. Thanks. :)

>but concatenate this post above if anyone
>doesn't make a reply in this precise moment.
Why don't you just edit your post instead of keep replying to yourself?

First of all is more comfortable and transparent to use quick reply feature. Also, the subscribed member will not receive a notice if I made a change.

I learned from now that this forum doesn't suport double-posts merge, like any other user, but for new users always will remain present this issue. The Quick Reply would be useless for some purposes.

>but concatenate this post above if anyone
>doesn't make a reply in this precise moment.
Why don't you just edit your post instead of keep replying to yourself?

To prove his point.

We assume I am not replying to myself but it is better don't complicate things :)

Edit has a expiring time, if you want to add something, think about double or triple posting

Updating instead of creating on this case would be less disk space on servers.

it would use prettymuch equal disk space. and disk space is cheap.

Yeap, two records isn't bigger than one. Maybe, if we talk about ten thousand rows, the maintenance task could take less time. But, my point is more focused on web usability, what is obvious. We can see the "quick reply" feature more as decorative widget by now.