Suggestion: Automatically lock inactive topics that are super-old.

[Curtis2011]

Lately I have noticed a few threads get posted in, where the original post is so old that a new reply to it wouldn't even be relevant to the original poster anymore.

Every once in awhile someone will post in a thread that is a few years old, where nobody has posted at all for the last year or more, and then that thread is brought back to the front page of the forum and people start discussing a super-ancient topic or post.

I was thinking it would be beneficial to have threads automatically lock if they have gone a year (or 6 months or whatever) with no posts in them.

Is this a feature that is easily implemented and would anyone else like to see it happen?

[SatvikBeri]

I would love to see this happen. I've seen this on other boards but I have no idea how easy it is.

[Angela]

I've seen threads and been the OP in a couple of them where the OP works through an issue in a matter of hours or days, and after that, a new post isn't relevant to the original poster anymore.

Should those be closed, too?

[supertom]

Originally Posted by Angela

I've seen threads and been the OP in a couple of them where the OP works through an issue in a matter of hours or days, and after that, a new post isn't relevant to the original poster anymore.

Should those be closed, too?

Nope, we can keep the discussion going if we choose. With the really old posts we'll have issues like some of the members not even using the forums anymore but also the member's opinions and truths will have changed if its in the scope of years.

It would be hilarious if this thread we were both replying to was years old

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by Angela

I've seen threads and been the OP in a couple of them where the OP works through an issue in a matter of hours or days, and after that, a new post isn't relevant to the original poster anymore.

Should those be closed, too?

Perhaps have an option to close threads that you yourself started?

Originally Posted by supertom

It would be hilarious if this thread we were both replying to was years old

Lol just wait a few years and I bet someone will find it and post...

[curiouslyrandom]

Can we at least close the booger eating thread from 2008? I didn't enjoy seeing that pop up on my screen when I'd just finished breakfast.

[openeyes]

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

Perhaps have an option to close threads that you yourself started?

If threads are to be closed, I'd prefer that method. I don't know if forum software currently supports it, but I could imagine when creating a thread being given the option to have it automatically close after a set number of days or posts, with the option to reopen or change that setting if so desired.

I would likely leave most if not all of mine open. I've had people PM me that they liked a thread I'd started, but weren't sure if I'd mind them commenting since it'd been a couple years. My response was to bump the thread myself so others could feel ok doing so.

If threads do start closing, people can always just create a new thread if they wanted to comment on something along similar lines (provided it wasn't closed due to it being too inflammatory). It's usually considered good practice to search for similar threads before starting a new one, but if the most appropriate thread has closed, there isn't much to do other than create a new one, maybe with a link back to the old one.

[moonrambler]

We have discussed this sporadically in the past (we, as in the Royal We ) and never came to any agreement. Personally, I don't mind at all when old threads get bumped, except when everybody starts talking to the OP who may not even have stopped in here after 2008 or something. If it's a personal thread, then it might as well be locked if it gets bumped. But a myriad of old threads are out there where I don't think it's a problem that they get bumped and people start the discussion up again.

One oddity is that I'd guess about 80 percent of these old thread bumps are due to spam. Usually a mod swoops in and deletes the spam and the thread goes back to whenceforth it came. What happens sometimes, though, is people don't recognize or ignore the spam and by the time a mod sees the thread, it's got five or seven new postings. So we delete the spam and let the conversation continue. Health & Fitness is a bonanza for spam bumps.

Here's one I just saw near the top of New Posts:

Women aren't attracted to men

[carenkh]

Originally Posted by moonrambler

Here's one I just saw near the top of New Posts:

Women aren't attracted to men

Oops - just deleted the new posts on that one, and let folks know they can start a new discussion if they want. For which, to be honest, I had no good reason other than this thread & the recent posters being surprised the thread was so old.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by carenkh

Oops - just deleted the new posts on that one, and let folks know they can start a new discussion if they want. For which, to be honest, I had no good reason other than this thread & the recent posters being surprised the thread was so old.

Yeah, see, this is where I don't know why it matters, except people can be taken aback if they're offering advice to someone who posted in 2007. If I see it when that happens, I'll make a post and mention that the thread is way old.

So in any case, my point is made . . . "We" have yet to come to any sort of agreement!

[Angela]

I'm in favor of MORE choices, not fewer. That's why I think moonrambler's solutions make sense.