I saw it again today, someone bumped a thread that was four or five years old. I know that bumping old threads is generally frowned upon, but my question is, why don’t the Mods or Admins just close threads that are older than, say, three or six months? That way nobody would be able to chime in months or years later. Is closing a thread a one-at-a-time operation? If so, I can see why it is not done. It would be nice if the board software would allow a mass closing of threads by date.
If I’m not speaking out of turn here, I think that the staff is trying to come to some formal conclusion as to how to handle this.
The general consensus, which makes perfectly good sense to me, is that opening a thread older than three months will probably be allowed in GQ, Comments on Cecil’s Column, and Staff Reports. Quite often the info being provided is germane to the updated knowledge of the subject.
Opening threads older than three months in the other forums would NOT be allowed. If you have a followup to one of those, the preferred method is to open a new thread, and link to the old.
I’m not speaking for the Board, just my understanding of where we’re heading.
And, yes, we lock them one thread at a time.
Lord Ashtar said
The policy of the board has always been to not mess with the software.
I’m just echoing what samclem said, we’re discussing it. I do want to add, that it’s not just “policy” that says that we can’t monkey with the software, it’s also the very basic, practical fact that we don’t have the resources. We have only a handful of technical folks (OK, we have one, mainly), and he’s busy with all of the READER’s computer and internet processes, which are many. So, we just don’t have the resources to make software changes unless they’re really, really critical. (And I’m not sure whether the READER would even consider these Message Boards to be “really, really critical”.)
So, regardless of whether changes are brilliant or simple, we do not have the ability to make them.
Changes within the existing software (such as forum titles and such), those things Administrators can do, those aren’t as much a problem.
I wasn’t suggesting tinkering with the software. I assumed it was a commercial application, and just wasn’t sure whether it already had the capability to do a multiple close based on, say, a date parameter. Being a former software developer myself, I know what a nightmare it can be to go in and try to fix something in someone else’s code without making it worse! :eek:
How is it different to open a thread with a link to the old one rather then just adding a new post to an old one?
It seems to me that in both instances a person has to first use the search engin to find the old thread. (unless they just happened to bookmark it) Why is it better to have a link and presumable lots of views of the old thread than to just have the old thread back?
Good question, Zebra. I used to wonder that myself (without actually ever posting the question), but in one of the many threads on this topic, a Mod or Admin finally pointed out that posters listed in threads past may no longer be active on the board. So Poster 2 may respond to a comment in a revived thread made by Poster 1, not realizing that Poster 1 posted the comment some 4 years ago.
Until I read that explanation, I never even bothered to check the times and dates of threads or posts; now it’s a habit. But I think there is a good chance that a lot of people don’t check, so the scenario envisoned by the Mod or Admin is quite possible. By starting a new thread and linking to the old, people would be more inclinded to check dates of the post in the old thread. Or at least not expect old posters to respond to new posts.
And yes, I am too lazy to search for the thread that contains that explanation.
I get that, but I wouldn’t think it would be messing with the software. Wouldn’t it just be data manipulation? Assuming it’s a SQL database, I would think it would be really simple.
That’s not a current function with the software as is it made available to us.
Course, we COULD try Jerry’s proposed solution, which is to delete any posts more than, say, a year or so old. The server would be faster as well. However, I really don’t want to do this and I bet you don’t either.
Worth repeating: The reason we don’t want old threads re-opened is that:
(a) often, the original posters are gone (especially now that they have to pay) and it’s unfair to comment when they can’t comment back… nor will they ever see your comments. This is especially true in forums like IMHO and MPSIMS and the Pit.
(b) Let sleeping dogs lie. Let the dead stay buried. Don’t scratch scabs. Don’t re-open old wounds. Some newcomer wanders by and resurrects an old thread, but it may have hurtful implications. 'Taint worth it. We’re trying to build a community here, and a community has memories (some of which are painful, and some of which we just don’t want to drag up again.) (BTW, didja notice, no one ever resurrects “happy” threads about someone’s baby learning to talk or something, they only resurrect threads where someone is being pitted or in despair or whatever.) Again, this applies more to forums like IMHO and MPSIMS and the Pit than it does to CoCC.
Hence, discussions are in process to promulgate a Policy.