You may, but I don't think it's a good use for the sticky thread function. If you'd use that for general Lounge topics like this, however interesting, pretty soon you wouldn't see the forest for the trees any more. Much better to keep the thread bookmarked and bumped to the top with relevant updates.




Edit: This post was originally a response to artie505's reply in "THE CYBER-SECURITY THREAD".

with clean-up, it could be made a FTM-faq.

Maybe... but, it's not really a static subject. This sorta stuff changes from week to week. (and i'd like the input stream to remain less constrained formal than the FAQ section seems to be).

I wonder if creating a sticky which indexes key threads would be viable.

FAQ threads can be updated, and 'key threads' could be a topic. Putting key threads in a sticky is an interesting notion and might work too, but I'm still hesitant to recommend it. Something we'd like to mull over a bit more.

Either way and regardless where it's best to go, it may be a good idea to compile such a list of key threads and post it in the Mac FAQ Discussion forum. Thanks for bringing it up!

I like this idea but another alternative might be a "column" on the FTM Home Page along the lines of the "Late Breakers" at the late MFIF.

Another good suggestion. Of course, a list of 'seminal' threads on a variety of topics might quickly exceed available column speed, but, like the FAQ topics, this shouldn't have to be an impediment. After all, such columns need not be exhaustive, and function just fine as a pointer to valuable resources. (Since we cannot easily organize related threads into folders here, some thought may need to be given to an optimal organization of the list to prevent the forest from swamping the trees.)

If you expand the scope of the list beyond a single topic, an additional advantage is its value as FAQ source material: until a particular FAQ Discussion topic has sufficiently matured to advance to FAQ status, a thread list can fill the gap and suggest additional FAQ topics. Finally, it may help users identify items important enough to archive personally.

I have no solid idea on how "best" this sort of thing could/should be handled... so, i'm more than happy to go along with whatever organizational structure eventually gets implemented (if any).

Thanks (cyn) for separating this part out from "THE CYBER-SECURITY THREAD", and perhaps the title could even be tweaked now (as i've attempted with this post).