Forums / Maintenance / Suggest Ideas

6,927 total conversations in 573 threads

+ New Thread


How to Prevent Slow Moving Threads from Staying

Last posted Aug 03, 2017 at 06:47PM EDT. Added Aug 02, 2017 at 09:08AM EDT
5 posts from 3 users

So, you know how when no one posts in a thread for 30 days, the thread auto-locks? Well, I noticed that certain threads only update after weeks, to the dismay of forum moderators.

Solution: Make it so that if posts were made weeks apart, the auto-lock timer doesn't reset. The reason this could work is that out of the participants in a given thread, odds are that some of them subscribed to it so they could remember to post there once it finally updates. As a result, they would potentially revive the thread

What do you think?

Well, I noticed that certain threads only update after weeks, to the dismay of forum moderators.[citation needed]

The periodic bumping of completely useless threads is only a really an issue in the Maintenance board, which houses about of 0.7 constructive threads a month. I can say with full confidence that on the small chance a forum mod has actually looked in here, they don't mind older threads being brought back up. It couldn't possibly be worse than the same threads being made every month without end. The auto-lock timer exists to kill threads that no longer hold any discussion. Not threads with slow discussion; not threads that only need to be updated periodically; threads with no discussion. If people are posting in these threads, they either have a good reason, in which the thread should stay open, or are idiots, in which case the "no spam" and "stay on topic" rules are brought into play. I understand that there is a theoretical version of the automatic locking system better than the one we currently have, but I cannot think of a single example in which this small (and remember, theoretical) improvement actually matters.

If we're being honest, it's really just a small portion of users that don't seem to understand the "don't bump old threads" status quo on the internet. And as such, it's more efficient to just tell them than to change how the site works.

What do you think?

I don't see much of a reason. Mods already can lock threads, so if they feel a necropost is detrimental, they can just lock the thread anyway. If a thread's really dead, then a necropost will only delay it another month and if a necropost gets the thread going again, then there's still something to discuss.

xTSGx wrote:

What do you think?

I don't see much of a reason. Mods already can lock threads, so if they feel a necropost is detrimental, they can just lock the thread anyway. If a thread's really dead, then a necropost will only delay it another month and if a necropost gets the thread going again, then there's still something to discuss.

Good point

I'll just wait for this thread to auto-lock if it's really dead, as
a) I would have an example of that scenario, and
b) Doeoeod had already refuted my idea.

Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

Hello! You must login or signup first!