Locking Old Posts

[simonhill]

May I suggest that old posts are locked after a reasonable amount of time. Maybe 1½ or 2 years after last update. They could be reopened by the mods on application.

I ask this because I, and I think others, find it annoying/frustrating when very old posts that are now obsolete are revived. I realise that I should be more diligent and check dates, etc before I read reams of ancient history, but like others I often forget.

Obsolete because: tech info out of date; make or model now consigned to history; posters long gone; etc.

If the mods consider a post worth reopening, then go ahead. Alternatively they may recommend a new post.

I find it strange that some people are loathed to start new posts and would rather dig out an old, vaguely appropriate one.

Submitted for consideration.

[richardfm]

I quite like reading threads resurrected from the dead. I wouldn't like to see old threads locked

[PH]

I wonder if there's some sort of half way house, where the age of a post is highlighted, maybe by a different colour or something.
I find it annoying when I start reading an old post without realising it, particularly when I get down to my own response! OTOH sometimes the new contributions also make interesting reading.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Yep, now and again an old post needs resurrection, if for no other reason than to pour scorn on the idea that has been superseded over the ( insert number of years ).

[simonhill]

I quite like reading threads resurrected from the dead. I wouldn't like to see old threads locked

Richard you will still be able to see all the old posts. I am only advocating locking them. On your "most favourite forum", the Tea Shop, there are 158 pages with 50 topics per page. Plenty to choose from there.

PH: Highlighting the age might be a workable compromise. although, I still prefer a (openable) lock.

Remember, I not saying lock away forever. The last reply could say something like:

This topic has been locked due to inactivity. To reopen, click here (reply box opens) and briefly explain why to a moderator.

[mattheus]

I vote No.
(Although I understand your frustration, people really should check the dates!)

I find it strange that some people are loathed to start new posts and would rather dig out an old, vaguely appropriate one.

Submitted for consideration.

The reason for doing this is to keep all the relevant info together.think of these topics like Wiki pages - we improve and build knowledge over time!

[Cyril Haearn]

That should create even more work for the mods, -1, no!

I am wondering if I should mark old threads that I resurrect with a short notice, after how long? One year, two years?

A lot of stuff that one should otherwise have missed is reactivated by thread resuscitation, besides, when one clicks on 'unread posts' the date the thread was started is shown, no need to click on it

[tatanab]

The reason for doing this is to keep all the relevant info together.think of these topics like Wiki pages - we improve and build knowledge over time!

Sometimes I wish more people would dig up old threads. Then we would not get the same themes repeated every 3 months - lights/dogs/shared use/ etc with the same hoary old arguments aired yet again.

[Cyril Haearn]

The reason for doing this is to keep all the relevant info together.think of these topics like Wiki pages - we improve and build knowledge over time!

Sometimes I wish more people would dig up old threads. Then we would not get the same themes repeated every 3 months - lights/dogs/shared use/ etc with the same hoary old arguments aired yet again.

Right again tatanab, the Uppadine thread has just popped up again, one of my favourites

[Graham]

I don't think there is a mechanism provided for timed-topic-lock.

It would be very helpful if any regular poster, who revives a moribund topic, could start with a warning statement . . . . .
e.g.

*** I'm reviving this topic, which was last active : TEN years ago ***

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Leave it as it is.
Why does it bother anyone.

[Bonefishblues]

I don't think there is a mechanism provided for timed-topic-lock.

It would be very helpful if any regular poster, who revives a moribund topic, could start with a warning statement . . . . .
e.g.

*** I'm reviving this topic, which was last active : TEN years ago ***

I think that's a sensible and courteous way forward.

[thatsnotmyname]

Obsolete because: tech info out of date;

In which case, updating/correcting it by adding to the thread would be a perfectly valid course of action, would it not?

[mjr]

Remember, I not saying lock away forever. The last reply could say something like:

This topic has been locked due to inactivity. To reopen, click here (reply box opens) and briefly explain why to a moderator.

Oooh I hate seeing "This topic has been locked due to inactivity". The [inappropriate word removed] advisor forums and reddit both do that sort of thing and it devalues them massively, especially for slow-changing topics. Why should info on something like Sturmey Archer 3-speeds have to be scattered over 22 pages just because they're not changing the design every three days and they don't cause owners anguish every second chain change?

[mjr]

Oh I see what this is about. Another thread where someone has made repeated off topic posts asking "why has someone posted here years after the last post?" instead of using the report button to report an off-topic post. Go and ride your bikes instead, please! There's defects to spot and report for repair.