As a new member, I am surprised by the apparent lack of purges, so that topics from one or even two years ago are still on the board. This is not a problem for people just browsing the forums looking for something interesting, but it presents a problem to those looking for something specific.
If you will go to the "666 ?" board in general chat, you will see the problem clearly. It has been inactive for a year until I posted on it recently. The mod said they couldn't see why it became active again. The answer is simple - it was one of the top topics when I ran my first search, it looked interesting and so I posted on it, not knowing when the last post was made (me being new and all). To me, this creates a problem. So often I like to search topics, and find things that interest me quickly. However, it is wholly possible to find old topics and revive them, prompting remarks from the moderators (in my case about this being a spam topic, it being old, and for some reason someone, me I think, double posting(!?)). It is a pointless exercise for me, and certainly for the mod. It is a situation that is easily remedied by conducting purges of old topics. Is this possible? It would certainly help those who prefer to search topics rather than just browse.
At least this showed the mods are pretty visible and active, unlike some forums I've used where they are practically non-existent.
I agree. I hate when mods lock a topic simply because "oh you posted in an old topic" as long as you had something good to say, who cares!? the point is to keep conversations going.... so why start a new topic when already is out there, with plenty of posts.
However, I am not saying the mod did not have the right to lock the 666 thread (as I have not looked at it... to see if these new posts or more spam than contribution) but even so... when someone does say something good in them, they are still locked. I think this is rather dumb.
next I do not think old topics should be deleted...as how do you know that some of the ones are deleted anrt helpfull topics that already have a web design questions asnwered...or a php problem fixed...thats over 2 years old...ect, I have found lots of help from old topics, thus... why I think they are not removed. and should NOT be removed.
Oh damn you should have searched before you posted this thread as well! Look here: http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-71767.html this sort of thing has already been discussed quite extensively. It's called "bumping" and personally I don't care if people do it. However, the mods work VERY hard to keep this forum free of SPAM and they do a wonderful job. The issue of searching and finding an old topic just to say something (=points) is quite a hard one to combat without actually removing the points awarded. Perhaps if your previous problem didn't award you any points the mods may not have locked it but still the idea is to stop 30 people all adding a one sentence response and I'd personally rather miss out on the points than have 30 people say "yeah i agree". But, we don't have the facility to do this so mods lock the topics instead which I don't like. Either way get used to it, it isn't likely to change because although it is annoying, there are bigger problems that are way more important than this one!
As for purging old threads if what I mentioned above is implements (no points on old topics OR mods don't lock it ONLY because it is old) is not required. You just need to make sure to post in current-ish topics or make good quality posts to make sure you don't get into trouble!
ehh I really woudnt think of it as a dumb... a dumb is more whn you have nothing to say, and you just want to push the topic up so others will see it, in this case... he didnt do it it bump it, he did it cause he had something to say on the topic.
I don't see why a topic being old makes it bad by default and perhaps we'd see fewer duplicate topics if there weren't such a knee-jerk backlash against 'thread necromancy'. Perhaps a more informed decision would be in order, as the OP suggests.
Or as I suggested before (I think)
A cron job run weekly which locks all topics that have been inactive for over x ammount of months
garoinw, I'm still quite opposed to automatically locking old threads. I believe that certain old threads certainly can be revived if you have something interesting to say in it. The reason why we generally lock up old threads which get bumped is because people generally locate old threads which are generally not very useful, and were left open at a time when we weren't so strict about locking bad threads.
If you do find an old thread that interests you, and you have something constructive to add to it, I think it would be ok for you to bump it up. If a mod still locks it, you can feel free to PM that Mod or any other mod (or me or any other Admin) asking why it was locked. When this happens, we will either give you a good reason for locking it, or we'll discuss it internally whether it should remain locked or be unlocked.
I like that idea that something has an end. If the topic should be revived, somebody will try to start a related thread.
I do think that after a year or so the old threads should be taken off of the site, if space becomes an issue. If not, let it go.
The ad purging is a good idea. ads take a lot of space and band width. Especially when they are linked and always updating. I use hotmail and their ads are constantly using my Internet band width. I would not like to find how long things would take if I still had dial-up.
|I do think that after a year or so the old threads should be taken off of the site, if space becomes an issue. If not, let it go. |
Space is not a problem on the site.
As for ads, have you not noticed that once you log in, you don't see any more ads?
If a thread is old, and you don't want to bump it and risk annoying a mod, why not start a new thread and link to an old one...?
For example, you find a thread on topic XYZ. The last post was a year old, but you have some constructive stuff to add.
So you start a new topic...
"I was browsing the forums and found this old thread. *Link to old thread here*
*Paragraph summary of thread here*
*Your new opinion or statement here*"
One downside I see to posting in an old thread, is that if there are already three pages of responses I don't want to read them all before responding. If I haven't read the whole thread, though, I don't feel comfortable responding. So something like this - where you give a summary of what has been said and then direct the conversation in a new direction - can start a new conversation for people who weren't around when the old thread was started.
For me, too many threads get locked,the forums should be more fluid and less rigid.on busy forums,old topics are less likely to be revived as the traffic of new threads would push old threads so far down the pecking order that its unlikely anyone would come across it without a search. Even then i dont think its so bad that they add to it should they want to.
I really think people should read replies before they post replies...
|tidruG wrote: |
|If you do find an old thread that interests you, and you have something constructive to add to it, I think it would be ok for you to bump it up. If a mod still locks it, you can feel free to PM that Mod or any other mod (or me or any other Admin) asking why it was locked. When this happens, we will either give you a good reason for locking it, or we'll discuss it internally whether it should remain locked or be unlocked. |
Just scroll up a bit to see that I've already written this.
The locking of threads has nothing to do with purges, actually. However, yes, we are quite strict about the quality of threads which are allowed to remain open. However, I feel the staff have quite relaxed about it. Otherwise, threads like the Clipboard thread (in the General Chat forum) would have been closed quite some time back.
|truespeed wrote: |
|For me, too many threads get locked,the forums should be more fluid and less rigid. |
Either close all the threads in which the discussion has clearly finished - regardless of age - or close none. I'd go with none, and ban people that add nothing, but that's just me.
We warn them first
|ban people that add nothing |
Also, we don't close threads which are old. We only close threads that need to be closed for other purposes, such as uselessness or rule-breaking or flaming, etc.
|such as uselessness or rule-breaking or flaming, etc. |
Why close them? The threads themselves aren't bad, just the posts. Remove or trash the posts and continue, surely?
In a lot of cases, the topic of the post itself is such that it will most likely promote uselessness or flaming.
Generally, we do remove the bad posts. We only lock the threads when we think that the same thing is likely to happen again anyway.