How do I start a side thread?
number in options field as long as it's not an op
test
Thanks.
test op
This feature has always been kind of lame
>>Anonymous 2020-03-07T20:32:13no u
your lame
>>4According to tabamin, it was designed to allow you to shame someone without derailing the thread. The intent was that if you have a box beneath your post it means you said something stupid enough that at least one person went out of their way to start a side-thread on your post. This way, people can get called out for being dumb without the site turning overly-aggressive or chaotic like 4chan.
Nice
Decided to add an entry for that feature into the about page since I never really knew myself.
I'm not much of a writter
>>5It's for a couple reasons. One is what you wrote, except for the "shame" part, that doesn't make any sense since anyone can do sub replies for any reason. But it does catch derails if people are trying to shame each other.The point isn't to figure out who is shamed and who isn't, in fact it's exactly that kind of mentality that it's supposed to put an end to. The point is that we shouldn't give a fuck. If 2 people want to have at it, nothing is going to stop them, but they don't have to derail the thread in the process.Another reason is that it's basically another form of sage, except that the arguments people usually give for thinking sage is a "downvote" don't hold.
I thought if they went top to bottom, like normal, then the 1st comment would be most visible and later comments are harder to see (you have to expand the box more). That could motivate shitposters to be the "first one".
Why are sagethreads contravariantly (w.r.t. (nonsage) thread order) ordered? Also, I demand sidethreads for sidethreads; let 'em tree, I say.sidethreadding doesn't bump. I'm terribly sorry; since I know this, it's all but obligatory:sage
testing if it bumps
Now that I know how to use it, I really miss it from other sites.
