zlacker

>>gmays+(OP)
(We re-upped this post because it hadn't made the frontpage despite lots of upvotes - which happens sometimes.

This explains why some of the comments have timestamps that appear older than the post itself. I got tired of trying to make them line up, sorry!)

>>dang+Yac
> I got tired of trying to make them line up, sorry!

IMHO, it's less disorienting to have the post dated after the comments than it is to see a comment you thought you wrote a couple days ago but is dated today. So you're welcome to stop trying to line up timestamps.

>>toast0+ecc
The problem is that it leads to endless confusion that ends up taking over threads. We tried it!

Status quo sucks also, it just sucks less. Haven't yet figured out an actually good solution. Sorry!

>>dang+krc
How about recording two dates on the post, the original post date and the re-upped date, and then putting something like "14 hours ago; originally 2 days ago" in the post header?

>>skybri+4uc
How about simply not tampering with the date on the post?

The most I imagine most folks saying is "Didn't I see this post on the front page days ago?". For many other discussion fora, it's not uncommon for posts to be at the top of the pile for many days... so a days-old post date should be nothing unusual.

>>simonc+mNc
That's exactly what we tried and didn't work. The amount of noise it generated was vastly greater than the noise the status quo generates, unsatisfactory though it is.