Will disable_jump_reply make a return?

When a forum is organised with mega topics like that, it really sounds like it should be a true threaded forum system, not Discourse’s flat-but-with-post-links. With threaded topics can branch and get deeper, and this whole problem disappears.

Now I don’t think it would be impossible to make a plugin which turned Discourse into a threaded forum. The database structure probably wouldn’t need to change, just the queries that retrieved posts, and of course the UI. It would be a big undertaking. But it would work much better than replying in the middle of a flat forum does.

1 Like

I guess this is the logical conclusion here, which is why @codinghorror is so apprehensive here.

This is fundamentally an attempt to sneak in threading, and we have zero plans to ever tackle a threaded view for our forum it would be fiendishly complex and completely against our core project mission statement.

Just to set expectations here, we have no plans to do anything here for at least 6 months.

Jeff is open to adding a ninja per time you post, don’t blow off my foot if I am a bomb disposal expert toggle. I am worried about complexity here in the UX, but we can think about this again in 6 months.

In the interim my recommendation would be just to reorganise threaded topics into multiple topics. Much of this is “but I want to install a mega pancreas that eats up all my sugar in one go”, eat less sugar?

One mega politics topic -> One politics directory topic + multiple sub-discussion topics.

One giant GoT topic -> GoT directory + Per episode GoT topic


Mostly it is a UI issue, gotta figure out where to put “reply but don’t jump to end” option. In my opinion even something like

hold shift when pressing reply to avoid jumping to the end

would be fine. Not workable on mobile, obviously, but the concept is sound.



I used to just copy/delete/paste posts and ensure I pressed the correct “reply” button for the response I wanted. I had no idea I could switch on the fly!

Speaking of holes: Is there a way to clear them? The back button went a bit crazy the other day and it ended up pointing at the top of QT3s Game Of Thrones mega-thread, even though I was “fully read” and possibly the last poster in that thread. It turns out there were quite a few posts near the top that weren’t marked as read, and they still are, because I’m not going to manually scroll down them all to satisfy Discourse. I’d never seen that before, though.

( I also find it ironic, as Discourse is usually hell bent on destroying my precious read position and getting me to the bottom of the thread)

It’s quite easy, but completely impractical. I already have a dedicated tab open for the QT3 Star Trek watching thread because Discourse mangled my read position with its search results. (ps I purposefully linked to the end there to mess with your read markers in that thread) Perhaps I should keep a physically notebook open by my desk and write down all of my read markers for all important threads, just on the (likely) chance that Discourse blows them away?


I was just wanting a feature back that was taken away recently, that I used a lot.

Believe me, this is not a super secret underhanded way of asking for a threaded view. A threaded view wouldn’t work well at Qt3 anyway. Things are fine the way they are. If we had to start a new topic for every little thing discussed during the Trump era in the politics discussion that would be a LOT messier than just keeping things within the megathread topics. A much, much easier solution to the problem than a threaded view is just to allow me to disable jump to reply, which used to be an option. I’m fine with codinghorror’s solution of doing it per thread as well. That might actually work better than the old way.


I always used it and loved the feature. I was very surprised when suddenly it was gone earlier this week/last week. I’m a user of WaniKani’s forums, and some of those threads are exceptionally long (including the helpful ones).

I never noticed a problem with it, it always seemed to work for me.

I would really appreciate it if the option would return to user settings.

Thanks for asking for and considering our feedback.

EDIT: Well, I see that nothing is going to be done about this for 6 months… If @sam’s reply button idea gets implemented, would it be when you press reply at the bottom of the post, or in the top left of the compose box as shown in the posts you’ve made? Personally, I would prefer the former, hidden under the “…” next to reply and edit. I tend to forget the button on the compose box even exists, and don’t even know where to access that on mobile.

Although it seems like @codinghorror has his mind made up anyway, and doesn’t care about Japanese learning resources, or grammar help. (But yes, 80% of the insane posts at WaniKani is chatter by your definition; the WaniKani community is a strange beast… Which thrives on it’s strangeness.)

1 Like

What I favor at the moment is …

  • hold down the shift key when clicking the composer reply button (on desktop)
  • tap and hold the composer reply button (on mobile)

… this will enable “expert reply mode” for that specific reply, where you do not jump to your new post in the topic stream after replying.

Not sure when we’ll get to this, but should be sometime in the next 6 months.


I agree with this. I have no stake in the “jump to reply” discussion, but I wanted to support that there are some legitimate usages of mega topics. I’m a member of a language learning forum, where we have (for example) a mega topic for asking short grammar questions. Without that we’d get a ton of small topics, which are then hard to navigate. By having this one mega topic where people ask most grammar-related questions, everything is organized in one place, which is convenient for both the people asking the questions and the people answering the questions.

Just a minor suggestion on top of that: Since Ctrl + Enter submits the post, could Ctrl + Shift + Enter submit the post in this "expert reply mode”?


It should – I can’t see any reason why they can’t work together.


The thing is that none of these things are ‘bad habits’, they are simply things you don’t agree with. Not washing hands after going to the loo is a bad habit because you endanger others with germs; having topics where posts can be replied to without the need to read the rest of the posts in the topic is simply a different situation to one you prefer.

One of the useful things about this site is that you get the link down to replies to a post. This means you can immediately see if a given specifically targeted post has been addressed. There might be 300 posts below the one I’m reading but if there’s no
under it then I can safely reply knowing I don’t need to read the rest of it.

While it might be nice to assume that all Topics can work in the same way, be narrow and specific, it’s simply not practical to assume that is the way all communities will work. DrownedInSound has a morning thread and an evening thread every day that generate several 100 posts of chat between members. Essentially they are miscellaneous topics and they work well as a sort of cowcatcher for posts that might otherwise not fit in existing topics.


This is the case for me and our members as well. People are asking about how to stop Discourse jumping to their replies.

In our community, it is vice-versa — it is not used only by .00001% of people.

1 Like

It’s been gone for more than seven months at this point.

How many people can it be if ~two thirds of a year can pass before it’s removal is noted?

1 Like

I think that this is a great feature for Discourse. If an exception can be said to prove the rule then, for me, this is it.

I will enable this on my forums because it has so much potential for topic types. I provide some concepts further below which you can get to by skipping til after the two quotes below.

I honestly couldn’t work out what this feature would do for people because it is so anti the way I work. Normally I fully read a topic before responding, draft a reply and fill it while I keep reading, use bookmarks to remember where I was up to.

Six months later, it was still a mystery until I read this comment:

But hold on, there’s no obvious attempt at systematic organisation of topics apart from organizing a box for all the topics to be thrown together. We could more accurately describe it as a topic where everything is disorganized in one place. It seems that the effort required to organize the discussion is perceived to be greater than the benefits.

That’s exactly why this feature is not consistent with what I’d call Discourse’s discussion by design:

So while I agree with the critics that this feature allows bad habits, instead of opposing it, I argue for this sort of desultory engagement to be allowed.

What this feature will allow me to do is to:

  • provide another feature I can use to promote Discourse …

  • … and engage desultory users more easily

  • but most importantly operate with some new topic types where reading and responding are asynchronous or out of step and where topics are more reflexive in other ways than usual:

    • Logs where the reading is a journey but I need to be able to interact with the latest status report. I both want to read everything and interact with the latest notification.
      E.g. in a travelog where the author is writing it and I am reading it but never up-to-date. I can personalise this one because I want to setup a family forum where our family members can post their travel notes. My wife wants to reply to those updates or request an update without losing her reading place.

    • Diagnostics where there is a payoff to getting an early solution
      E.g. problem solving where Windows has crashed with certain error codes then I’d always suggest checking drivers are updated even without reading the entire. I remember many times where I’ve seen a reported problem and only had time to dash off a quick reply before heading off to another commitment.

    • Spoilers as already discussed.

    • Mystery games where being first to guess the result is the goal. This is kind of opposite to avoiding spoilers because there is one spoiler we’re all seeking to reveal.
      E.g. a competition where each user only gets three replies or guesses - a plug-in would help enforce this the limit.

    • Adaptations where replies are designed to suggest a new path for the topic. Again the opposite of spoilers but there is no limit to the number of accepted suggestions.
      E.g. Writing a serial story where readers can introduce keywords or themes that affect the story as it is serialized. This is like the movie of the same name Adaptation
      E.g. a live interview where I can follow the interview and ask questions at the same time. It may be tidier to have questions in a separate topic or via PM but this way everyone can see what other readers are interested in, can catch the mood of the crowd.

There are some practical issues so go ahead and suggest more uses and improvements. :smiley:

1 Like

So, the feature was there, and our community were using it.

Now it’s gone just because it is not useful to other communities?

Following this approach, more features can be removed. I don’t think it makes sense.

My community and I miss this feature, and if it’s back, we’ll definitely use it. And as it can be seen in this thread (and other linked ones), look like I’m not alone. So should be enough at least not to remove the existing feature to which people got used and which they love?

I personally may comment on different ideas while reading a 500+ posts topic from its start. It always worked like a charm. Now I just feel lost after it jumps to the very end and there is no way back.

Another good case is as follows:

If I reply in a very active topic, 2-3 replies may appear while I type mine. As soon as it jumps, I have no idea how many new replies I missed.


It was removed close to eight months ago though, right?

I really don’t see the logic in responding to a topic before you know definitively whether others have already made the same point.

Yes, so what?

I was very busy with my main job and had no time to deal with it. Others were struggling all that time.

So it’s nowhere being supporting the idea that I don’t need it. I still need it and I miss it.

Okay, you don’t see the logic, but I do. It worked well for me (and our moderators, and many members) for years. Means they see the logic in it and they use it and they like it. Everyone is different.

Plus, trying to be constructive and give examples, I described a few examples above that make a lot of logic to me. Those cases do not need to be logical to everyone though.


These should be in Discord or Slack, not Discourse. There’s your problem right there.


This is just how software development works. If companies kept every feature that < 5% of users used, eventually their software would become buggy and it would become difficult to add features that 90% of users might benefit from.


The only problem I have is you took away a perfectly useful feature because of a bug I didn’t really care about :wink:


So was there a decision not to bring that feature back?