Old v4 merged them (and sometimes, did it very ugly and took over other posts).
v5 used to merge them.
Now it doesn't.
Should I change it back? Leave it? I want your opinions.

I just voted and my answer isnt up there.

Anyways I think merging is better. 64% of double posters are spammers,bots,noobs, ninjas and retards.

hmm odd...

I would prefer merging. But if (for coding reasons) you need it to stay the way it is for the time being, I understand.

No coding reasons, I just commented out the part that merges old posts and in a few seconds, they can be back again.

It should merge them unless their text is the same (in which case it ignores one).

I liked the way v4 did it, where it would automatically merge posts, but not if there was a gap of a month or so between the two.

Merge and set the topic as unread, as opposed to edit which would not set the topic as unread.

Yea, merging is good

I agree with both; but when the posts are more than a month apart, I think it should merge and bump the topic (not in other cases).

If I remember right, it would make a new post if the old post was after 3 hours old.

I like idea of merging only before a set amount of time has passed, maybe an hour?

However, I think a merged post should look like

Original Post

---

Next post

I don't like the ~Addition~ message I believe was in v5 before since sometimes a double post isn't an addition to another post. It should just be some kind of clearly visible line, because if its two merged posts, but they're responding to two completely differents, I think there should be something visible to show that.

I am in complete agreement. Although I'm not even sure if we need to wait an hour, 15-30 minutes might be ok.

Yeah, line breaks would be neat.

---

Example, like this.

Like a signature line break maybe?

I would say 75% of the signature break centered.

I got rid of the ~ additional ~ like 2 days before i got rid of the merged posts, because I agree, it was gay.
Line break might be nice.

There's no way I could mimick the signature line (completely) unless I kept it as two seperate posts in the db and merged them together upon reading Which is doable. However, instead of 20 posts / page, you'd only technically see 20 posts - merged posts / page.

Even just a bar in the middle of the page would be enough.

The break line is nice enough. There's no need for overkill by trying to mimick the signature line.
I don't think there's much difference between having different posts and merged posts if the line also includes the merging date(?) and time.

I would prefer an option of this. Have it automatically merge post, but you can uncheck it somewhere, so if you are trying to make an information spot, and want to do links to different sections (to different posts) you could do that. Like I made with the Clan[O] Information topic in v4, it was a little more complicated that way, but I liked the ability to be able to jump across the page that way. Unless you can do that with the additions too? Or will there be a bbcode to do that?


But then you would have to have the post# in the name part, so it doesn't go to someone elses name with it. I think it would be a great feature for documentations and information topics.

Erm, you basically want innerpage links/anchors.