Locking threads more than a year old?

[leehljp]

While this is not a priority at this point, is there any way to automatically have threads "locked" after more than a year's inactivity so that new posts can't be added? Referencing an older posts/threads with links is OK, IMHO, but to revive old threads/posts as though they were recent - kinda plays tricks with my mind!

Anyone else feel this way?

[Black wallnut]

I agree. I'm guessing there is a way to close threads after a specific time period but I would hate to do so as there are some times when replying to an old thread makes sense.

[LinuxRandal]

I am pretty sure Lchien recently raised a thread, from YEARS ago, where he did some wood sanding blocks. I have also seen members ask members to find lost pictures, or how did they do something, by res-erecting a post. These are reasons to NOT lock them. I have also seen people reply to someones question from YEARS earlier, and normally it is a more recent member. Then I just shake my head as it is like trying to have a conversation in an echo chamber, with the speech that is bouncing around.

It can be annoying, but I prefer to have them unlocked, personally and rely on people using self control and common sense (as you expect them to do with self moderation). We better be adults here.

[greenacres2]

On several occaisions i've seen posts answering real old questions as Linux mentioned, sometimes i'm amused but often it's a thread or topic i (as a newcomer) hadn't seen before and i can get some meat out of it. Happens on every message board i've ever seen so I've gotten in the habit of looking at the dates, so i guess it's not a bother to me to see the oldies.

And...a few times i've gotten excited about a for sale or bargain alert that was from the days before indoor plumbing!! Other than pricing and "new tool" technology from 2003--the techinques stay pretty much valid. I'd love to have people be able to comment on Niki's threads as an example (just hoping the archive can one day be restored), and would hate to see the wisdom and skills of the likes of Leehljp or Taraj or Loring (among others) locked down because of a calendar.

My 2 cents, your mileage may vary!!

earl

[tommyt654]

Ditto on what they said

[Turaj]

... kinda plays tricks with my mind!

Anyone else feel this way?

One solution that I have seen in another forum is the date of the original post is shown on the first page (as in "Started by ...., mm-dd-yyyy". This way a quick look lets me know how old is the thread. I believe they are using the same software.

[sweensdv]

I believe that it is a very rare case when a posting to an old old thread actually adds worth to that thread. Lock em up!

[chopnhack]

For the rare occasions when someone dredges up old posts I dont think we need to implement a new rule. If there is nothing of interest in the old post simply ignore it and allow the moderators to coax the newbie into posting a question with a link in the appropriate forum. Many times however discussion is sparked, ideas are renewed and in the post from Loring, I have yet another thing on the to do list.
We have done exceptionally well all these years with the few simple rules we all follow.

[leehljp]

One solution that I have seen in another forum is the date of the original post is shown on the first page (as in "Started by ...., mm-dd-yyyy". This way a quick look lets me know how old is the thread. I believe they are using the same software.

That is an idea. I too, have seen this on a couple of forums and it does let the users know immediately how old the post is.

When someone dredges up an old post and posts to it, most people don't notice the date of several years ago and then adds a reply to post as though it was yesterday. I have done it and then felt stupid later when I noticed that the post was 4 to 5 years old or older!

Niki's, and some of Lorings', - I would perfer not to add to their old thread, but rather "mention and link" from a new thread. A "new" chapter IMO, is better than continuously updating over "years".

[Cochese]

I would vote no. At the worst, put all threads that haven't been active in a year under moderation, so you can see if the post adds value to the existing thread. Then a mod could advise the poster to make a new thread and link to the old one.

[gerti]

Maybe not possible with the forum software: messages older than say 6 months could be shown with a slightly different color scheme. That way you don't read through a page before realizing "wait a sec... how old is this?", but folks could still add to old threads.

Sometimes it is appropriate to add something to an old thread, like reporting how something worked out. If you'd do that in a new thread linking to the old, folks finding the old thread using the search would never see the new additions.

[mpc]

I vote yes and no to locking older threads.

There, did I help any?

For most forums, I don't think locking should be implemented. Yes, we get the occasional person answering a 2-year old question long after the original poster has moved on... but sometimes we also get somebody digging up an old thread because it's relevant to their question.

However, I vote "yes" to locking Bargain Alert and For-Sale type of forums after a period of time... and a year is probably too long for such forums. Just a few months is probably sufficient. For for-sale threads, the seller ought to be able to lock it when the item is sold, or delete the whole thread perhaps?

mpc

[BobSch]

And here I thought this was going to be about Loctite.

I like the idea of some obvious indicator of an old post, but I don't think locking them is necessary.