It sounds probably ridiculous since people usually want to avoid or remove duplicate threads. However I have a use case right now where I need to duplicate a thread. How can I do it?
2 Mi Piace
Manually ? You can navigate to the raw contents of the topic by going to /raw/{topic_id} and copying everything there.
So, https://meta.discourse.org/t/195111 becomes https://meta.discourse.org/raw/195111
By the way, Discourse calls topics what you call âthreadsâ
Edit: or, if you are TL4/staff you can just click edit and copy everything there
4 Mi Piace
Actually that doesnât do what I need. I want all the topic with all the replies. I want an exact duplicate of the thread, but with different topic_id
1 Mi Piace
I found a way to âreproduceâ a whole thread which was laborious but no way to truly duplicate it. (Retaining the likes for instance)
I create a new thread and put it in a non accessible category e.g. staff. I copy each reply from the original topic tread and paste it in a reply in the new topic thread. For replies I only need in the new topic thread, I just select and move them. Then I change ownership of the copied reply to the name of the poster of the original reply. Once I am done, I close the original thread and I change the category of the new topic to a public category.
Of course this is too painstaking to use on a regular basis. The reason I needed to do it this time was because someone created a topic with a very long title that could be interpreted in two different topic threads. We (moderators) noted the issue of long title (this will be restricted to less characters now) but didnât realize at that time that it would cause a problem.
The conversation started and before we knew it, we had two very intertwined delicate conversations going on, with some offensive comments from one member that nevertheless provoked a rich series of responses in both matters.
To retain the richness of the contributions that had taken place, to reprimand the repeated offender, to use the event for community educational purpose and to permit both valuable conversations to grow each their way, I determined that it was best to split the topics apart, keeping only the pertinent interventions to each but not hesitating to repeat in both the interventions that were covering both matters for clarity comprehension purposes.
In the topic thread that retained the offensive reply, I also put a staff notice before the offensive post saying that it wasnât in accordance with our community values but that weâd let it for educational purpose. I doctored that post in the following manner: I put the markdown code < del >
In front of the offensive language
I explained that to express his opinion in a constructive manner the member
would have been better wording it
< ins > this way instead.
That was a lot of work and thinking. I would not do that again manually. But the use case is definitely there.
2 Mi Piace
That sounds like a lot of work! You might get better feedback next time when you donât just ask for technical support (âHow can I duplicate a topic?â), but explain the situation and what you want to achieve in your initial post. E.g. you probably could have just closed the topic, put a staff note as last post and link it to two new topics where the respective discussions could continue?
7 Mi Piace
I canât blame you for your comment: we often ask what is the goal when people ask for technical stuff about fmpro on our board.
However I was dead set on my intent to experiment this approach with the current situation. I knew about closing thread and starting two new topics. I wanted to use the existing material for educational purposes.
We have a very good community, lots of great contributions. However, we were born out of frustration with the vendorâs platform. So I have been using various approach and change management techniques to help people move away from the whining and bitching about the vendor.
Most have progressed in the way they express critical opinions about the product or the vendor. Unfortunately a few individuals had the tendency to stir the pot and brought upon the community a bad reputation and valuable members of the ecosystem whom have a closer or privileged relationship with the vendor wonât come near us. Which is unfortunate because we have grown organically as most people when they become aware that we exist like the forums and want to stay and these stellar members were bringing in valuable expertise and content.
Two very reputable and esteemed developers had to withstand bickering and had to âworkâ too hard to rectify information and lost the motivation and fun to contribute and removed themselves.
We did moderate but it was just unpleasant to constantly have the same irritating behaviours resurfacing and by trying to give everyone the right to their say, I eventually realize that it was somewhat unfair on everyone to have to exercise tolerance and forcing them to witness unpleasantries because a few would not refrain from being jerks.
Our FAQ did nit impress upon them the faculty to observe and recognize the faults in their interactions. Instead of doâs and donâts, or guidelines people interpret how they want anyway, our new administrator decided to promote values instead. It turns out it is easier to moderate because we just say that post doesnât abide by our community values so it was edited (or hidden until you modify it).
However we eventually realized that doing this didnât help people who have been communicating poorly all their lives to know how to do better.
So now we are adding educational interventions, basically metacommunicating, directly in the threads. Weâll se how that turns out.
5 Mi Piace
I know, @HAWK even edited my title to reflect that.
I use threads exactly to avoid what happened here: your suggestion was a solution to duplicate the topic (aka the initial post). However what I wanted was a solution to duplicate the whole thread (which is the the initial post aka topic + all the following replies.
In other words, when you create a new topic and people post replies, what you get is a thread.
Thatâs the thing â you donât⊠There is literally no such thing as a thread in Discourse. The first post and all responses together are called a topic.
2 Mi Piace
I will accept the concept you expose in the context of Discourse. However, linguistically, philosophically, and historically in the online fora domain, thread is what best describe the thing that has for components a titled initial post and the following replies. 
1 Mi Piace
Agreed, but the thing that youâre missing here is that Discourse doesnât have threading like all other forum platforms do. That is literally why we make this distinction.
4 Mi Piace
You make a point. In this case a discussion or conversation might be a better term since it is less specific about the design uniting the components 
3 Mi Piace
Bene, puoi cercare la definizione di argomento su Google:
top·ic
/ËtĂ€pik/
una questione trattata in un testo, discorso o conversazione; un soggetto.
Ă abbastanza accurato. Se preferisci una parola diversa per motivi personali, sei libero di modificare il testo in Discourse tramite Admin, Personalizza.
Per quanto riguarda la questione originaleâŠ
PerchĂ© non premere la chiave inglese dellâamministratore sullâargomento e dividere lâargomento, in modo che le risposte sullââaltroâ argomento siano in un argomento diverso, ma collegato? Questa sarebbe la linea dâazione piĂč semplice, supportata da una serie di strumenti in Discourse.
2 Mi Piace
Perché:
âVolevo separare gli argomenti, mantenendo solo gli interventi pertinenti a ciascuno ma senza esitare a ripetere in entrambi gli interventi che coprivano entrambe le questioni per chiarezza e comprensione.â
A meno che non ci sia un modo per copiare un post in un nuovo argomento lasciandolo anche nellâargomento originale che non ho ancora scoperto, la soluzione che proponi non consente di mantenere determinate risposte in entrambi gli argomenti a scopo di comprensione.
Capisco, se hai risposte molto intrecciate con molte citazioni da vari post potrebbe diventare complicato, ma dovrebbe essere relativamente raro. Ho moderato meta qui in quasi tutte le forme per quasi un decennio e non riesco a pensare a molte volte in cui ho incontrato questa ânecessitĂ â di duplicare un intero argomento⊠una normale divisione dellâargomento di solito funziona abbastanza bene.
2 Mi Piace
Jeff, ho un caso dâuso in cui duplicare un intero argomento sarebbe estremamente utile.
Utilizziamo la nostra istanza per la collaborazione aziendale, in particolare un sindacato. Ogni riunione creiamo un thread, lungo 8 post, in stile TOC.
Ogni riunione pubblica da 1 a 8, mentre sono molto diversi allâinterno dellâargomento, hanno lo stesso formato mese dopo mese con solo informazioni specifiche incollate. Sarebbe incredibilmente utile avere la possibilitĂ di creare un modello non solo per il primo post, ma per lâintero argomento, replicandolo ogni mese e inserendo le informazioni mensili.
Al momento, ho un argomento che ho creato in una categoria privata con il modello per ogni post da 1 a 8. Attualmente devo aprirlo a schermo diviso con un nuovo argomento, copiare il post 1 dallâargomento modello al nuovo argomento, poi il post 2, poi il post 3, ecc.
Sebbene questo sia un caso dâuso davvero insolito, ci sono alcune istanze che potrebbero davvero beneficiare di una funzionalitĂ di amministrazione per clonare un argomento, o se câĂš un modo per espandere il modello di argomento per includere piĂč modelli di risposta individuali annidati nella categoria con il modello di argomento.
Al momento, che si tratti di un modello di argomento o di una procedura guidata, tutto ciĂČ che posso fare Ăš clonare fondamentalmente un post #1 non compilato.
1 Mi Piace
Ciao,
Non potrebbe essere una soluzione migliore Discourse Canned Replies? Devi solo crearlo una volta per argomento e post, quindi puoi semplicemente selezionare i modelli.
4 Mi Piace
Sai⊠potrebbe funzionare bene. Avendoci dato unâocchiata, sono davvero incoraggiato. @Don grazie!
4 Mi Piace
Abbiamo anche un caso dâuso. Utilizziamo i messaggi privati a un gruppo come mezzo per richieste di aiuto private, ma incoraggiamo gli utenti a permetterci di rendere pubblica la loro richiesta. Preferiamo le richieste di aiuto pubbliche, cosĂŹ piĂč persone possono beneficiare dellâassistenza.
Idealmente, copieremmo la richiesta di aiuto dellâOP e le risposte selezionate in un nuovo argomento pubblico, escludendo il messaggio dellâauto-risponditore e le risposte in cui chiediamo se possiamo renderla pubblica, ecc.
CosĂŹ comâĂš, dovremo trasformare lâargomento del messaggio privato in un argomento completo in una categoria privata, eliminare le risposte che non vogliamo mostrare e poi spostarlo in unâarea pubblica.
CâĂš un motivo per cui non fai il contrario? Selezioni i post che vuoi rendere pubblici, li sposti in una nuova conversazione e poi la trasformi in un argomento pubblico? Mi sentirei piĂč sicuro a scegliere attentamente cosa pubblicare piuttosto che eliminare tutto ciĂČ che non voglio pubblicare.
4 Mi Piace
Questo Ăš un buon punto. Suppongo che avessi assunto che il post dellâOP non potesse essere spostato in un nuovo argomento. FarĂČ alcuni test e vedrĂČ come potrebbe funzionare. Grazie per il suggerimento.
1 Mi Piace