questionsis the current "foldering" system fair?


I actually wasn't aware of folding up until about 2 months ago. I don't like folding at all. If I didn't notice it, then I'm sure others don't either, so it gives an unfair disadvantage to someone posting multiple deals from the same site in an honest fashion. I don't think there is really a way to avoid people working around it either. The best thing to do would be to banish folding altogether. Unless the Woot gods would like to create a list of websites affiliated with one another so they get folded in... but that seems like a lot of work.


Perhaps an "Unfold all" or "Expand All" like many website have in their Comments sections. Everything defaults to Collapsed.


@capguncowboy: I'm not the biggest fan of folding (or collapsing as it is also sometimes called), but you have to understand why the Woot-gods invented it. In the pre-folding era, some vendors thought was a good place to post their entire catalog. All at once. This ruined the fun for everyone (cue up the classic "Ruining It For Everyone" SNL skit).

And if you hate the current system, multiple deals posted from different sites invoked folding for quite a while. That (very unpopular) setup was discontinued last summer.

Folding clues people in that they should be more selective with their postings if they want eyeballs on their deals. But right now it only serves that purpose for some; I'm just arguing for parity.


@heymo: I'm a HUGE fan of folding. When I see certain sites (like the one you mentioned) game the system by making random stupid subdomains, I never ever vote up their deals, no matter who posts them, or what they are. EVER. I really wish that staff would reach out and smack them, but I know it's not going to happen. Hey, @laalo, we don't like your little trick.

Okay, I'm better now.

I'm not sure how to handle tricks that some of the more prolific posters play. There's only a few that do it, and I'd think it would be simple to just change the code slightly and say that if you're posting from domain blah, of the form *.blah.tld (don't click on that; you'll go NOWHERE), that it should fold. That way, when someone posts deal1 from crap.blah.tld, and deal2 from junk.blah.tld, they'd both get folded under "see more deals from *.blah.tld posted by @blahtld" and that would be that.

Seems like a simple two line code change, to me.


/me staggers in from the archive with a precariously stacked pile of dust-laden files. Found it!

@shrdlu: I wish you'd dispense with the niceties and tell us how you really feel.


@heymo: PTHBTBHTPTHSSTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Edit] So, what's in the video from Facebook? I don't look at videos (well, almost never, and I definitely don't look at videos on spacebook). Come on, tell, you know you want to.


@shrdlu: It's the 1993 SNL skit I mentioned above (John Malkovich was the guest, as a psychopathic hitchhiker)

Most of the humor is in the delivery, but here's a bit from the transcript:

Hostess: Hello. and welcome to "Ruining It For Everyone", the show that brings you people who have ruined things for everyone else. Our first guest is David Klaunoff. David, why don't you tell us what you ruined for everyone else.

David Klaunoff: Well, back one evening in October 1972, I was in my kitchen making fudge for Halloween, and.. [ chuckles ] ..I don't know how it happened, but.. a couple of razor blades got in there, and I, uh.. I gave them out to some trick-or-treaters! [ laughs ] Anyway, there was a big uproar.. I kind of spooked everybody..

Hostess: Well.. so, now, because of you, parents don't allow their kids to eat unwrapped Halloween candy.

David Klaunoff: Yeah. I heard that some places outlawed trick-or-treating altogether! [ laughs ]


@heymo: Thanks for the video, now I'm afraid to pick up hitchhikers all over again.


Just last week I was thinking of announcing my change in how I feel about the folding but did not think it would be worth a question.

I do vote for folded items I know I said before I never do, I am over that now. Someone link that comment if they want.


@shawnmiller: would the solution be as simple as @shrdlu suggests? What she recommends seems logical.