Should threads lock after going 1yr inactive?

[awholley]

http://www.saxontheweb.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=7589

The thread above woke up after several years, and I think it shouldn't have, especially considering its subject line (which is largely invalidated by the contents and the new post).

It seems to me that a thread that is inactive for a year ought to be read-only if that's technically feasible (and also easy). I guess one could make the case that it's good to keep threads in one conversation, but we see the reverse happening as even more often when people don't use the search button.

This is intended to start a dialog so feel free to state your opposing viewpoints.

My viewpoint is that something that hasn't been discussed in a year is so dated that it should not be awakened -just kept in the attic for reference.

[Neil Sharpe]

I certainly understand your point with respect to this specific thread, but at the same time, are you also drawing a general conclusion from a specific example.

For example, in the Rock n' Roll section, there have been a number of threads concerning particular players, techniques, set-ups, etc., that have been dormant for over a year. However, a member does a "Search", finds the thread and adds new information. When see from this perspective, the SOTW Forum is an open, continuing, growing resource.

As for your point about this specific thread, I suggest your comment would be better directed to the Moderator in charge of that section and/or the Administrator.

[Grumps]

Not to mention that some folks go back and dredge up old threads just for fun to see if anyone is paying attention. Then you get guys giving advice to someone that's long moved on or otherwise solved their problem. Much worse are the more contentious threads brought back to life long after folks abandoned the fight. I agree though. Perhaps there is some way to automatically lock a thread after a certain amount of inactivity. You can always open a new thread with a link back to the old one should something genuinely new come up in regard to an old subject.

[Reedsplinter]

Speaking as one who was not hip to SOTW when this thread was new, I can say that I found this thread puzzling and not useful when it popped up this morning. I could easily have done without it.

On the other hand, there may be threads that contain real information of one kind or another that one would want to access, perhaps after periods of long inactivity. But locking the threads up would not prevent that, right? And if someone were sufficiently passionate about a subject, he or she could start a new thread.

[awholley]

On the other hand, there may be threads that contain real information of one kind or another that one would want to access, perhaps after periods of long inactivity. But locking the threads up would not prevent that, right?

I was suggesting leaving the threads available but read-only.

[Carl H.]

I was suggesting leaving the threads available but read-only.
That sounds good but might be counterproductive in some instances.

For example, a thread on what ligature is being used with hard rubbed Berg tenor mouthpieces has been popping up from time to time. I originally posted in it that I was using the stock lig, but have since switched twice and the ligature I am currently using on this piece is a significant amount better then both my previous additions to the list. It would be difficult to come up with a clear answer if my responses were in 3 different threads, but updating as changes occur, keeps the info current, as well as showing what pieces were used before arriving at my current setup.

I think the evolution is also useful to people interested in the topic of the thread. Maybe editing the off topic chaff from the threads after a year could be beneficial, but locking might make searches even more complicated.

[cymru97]

I agree with Carl, there was an older Vito thread that popped up recently that needed some clarification regarding the Yanagisawa-built horns. I tossed in a little note to try to clarify that info, if the thread had been locked we couldn't do that. If some poor sap actually used the search function and pulled up that thread it would have been incorrect.

I wouldn't make any changes. I think it's too bad the thread in question popped back up, but it seems rather isolated, or am I wrong?

[chitownjazz]

Might tend to send the wrong message with regard to using the search function, i.e., don't bother, because you won't be able to follow up (directly) on any threads you find.

I don't see this being a big issue and I think the potential downside (extra admin, confusion on the part of users, and so on) is greater in my opinion.

[gary]

Might tend to send the wrong message with regard to using the search function, i.e., don't bother, because you won't be able to follow up (directly) on any threads you find.
Well it should come as no surprise that this was the first thing that popped into my mind. :twisted:

But actually, I've thought of this previously. I agree with Grumps' concers as to why older threads should not be revived and I've asked myself the same question before but I always come up with chitownjazz's answer.

[Ferret]

I've been a part of forums that auto archive old threads, and it has worked well... however this forum is much more subdivided than that one was, so it isn't quite the same situation.

The decision here is between confusion from people not realizing a thread is 3 years old and placing it along side current threads and confusion from people not being able to directly reply to an old thread.

I tend to like the idea of autolocking REALLY old threads... but I don't have a strong preference either way. I don't think new users are afraid to post new topics, and often searches aren't as a means to find something to reply to and more as research. I don't stop using Google because I can't contribute to pages I look for.

[tjontheroad]

Makes no sense to lock old threads when you can start a new one just like it. You know that'll happen. That'll really drive you guys nuts :twisted:

[SAXISMYAXE]

Makes no sense to lock old threads when you can start a new one just like it. You know that'll happen. That'll really drive you guys nuts :twisted:
Yeah. What this joint really needs is an automatically merge redundant threads feature. Now THAT would be something great to behold!:D

[hakukani]

Yeah. What this joint really needs is an automatically merge redundant threads feature. Now THAT would be something great to behold!:D

...or how about a sub-thread feature that could spin off in other directions...

[SAXISMYAXE]

You mean that doesn't happen as a matter of course already? ;)

I'm not being critical here. Honestly, how many times can you answer the same old "which finish will make my horn sound more like so and so" threads ad nauseum, and keep a straight face?:banghead:

[tjontheroad]

It could be useful if there was some way to auto indicate a previously inactive thread. Like a color change of the title link or something like that if vBulletin has such a feature.

[chitownjazz]

How about an automated "translate my really cool idea into an actual feature" feature?

[chitownjazz]

You mean that doesn't happen as a matter of course already? ;)
...

Yea, but they do it in the same thread now. I think Hak is suggesting forking into a new thread.

That reminds me of the time I was driving through Pennsylvania, oh, would have been about '78 or '79, and I came to a fork in the road... :D

[Carl H.]

Yea, but they do it in the same thread now. I think Hak is suggesting forking into a new thread.

That reminds me of the time I was driving through Pennsylvania, oh, would have been about '78 or '79, and I came to a fork in the road... :D

Was that near the Schlossen cutoff?:;)

[SAXISMYAXE]

We are showing our age with that old Johnny skit. :D

[fballatore]

Apparently, Carl cut off his Schlossen a few too many times...

[Carl H.]

Apparently, Carl cut off his Schlossen a few too many times...
Only when my threads lock!:twisted:

[awholley]

It could be useful if there was some way to auto indicate a previously inactive thread. Like a color change of the title link or something like that if vBulletin has such a feature.

I'd be happy with this, or a pop up warning that says, "The most recent reply in this thread was over 1 year ago. Are you sure you want to post?" (Preferably with a single button in the windows tradition that gives only the option of "No". <grin>)

[Sigmund451]

A side topic:

In honor of his upcomming 10,000th post, can we make the "Search" button blink red for Gary :D

[bluesaxgirl]

I say we stop posting here and come back in say....a year or so and finish our thoughts. That's an idea. :D

But seriously, locking threads after one year is an idea. Most year old threads are either invalid or the person may not even be active anymore. Except for threads that never truly expire (like, "post a clip of you playing here"), they should be locked and accessable only for view.

[bluesaxgirl]

I'd be happy with this, or a pop up warning that says, "The most recent reply in this thread was over 1 year ago. Are you sure you want to post?" (Preferably with a single button in the windows tradition that gives only the option of "No". <grin>)
Yes...that's even a better idea.

[Reedsplinter]

Sometimes the cast of characters changes too. Coming at this without a lot of institutional history here, I at first thought that old thread that popped up was a frontal assault at our pal Simon Weiner. It took me awhile to work out that there is, so to speak, more than one Weiner in the world. :shock: Not that my misunderstanding is a severe (or unusual!:? ) problem, but the point is, contexts change with time, and therefore meaning changes.

Still, the bureaucratic difficulty of all this is certainly not lost on me: I go to meetings for a living! Whatever works for those who have to do the work is absolutely cool with me.

[Simon Weiner]

Sometimes the cast of characters changes too. Coming at this without a lot of institutional history here, I at first thought that old thread that popped up was a frontal assault at our pal Simon Weiner. It took me awhile to work out that there is, so to speak, more than one Weiner in the world. :shock: Not that my misunderstanding is a severe (or unusual!:? ) problem, but the point is, contexts change with time, and therefore meaning changes.

Still, the bureaucratic difficulty of all this is certainly not lost on me: I go to meetings for a living! Whatever works for those who have to do the work is absolutely cool with me.
:D ;) :) 8-)

[shmuelyosef]

Just wanted to apologize for being the offending idiot. I was using the search function, and found the thread about Weiner and wanted to put in a good word, as I have been fine dealing with them recently...my search wasn't even about Weiner...it's my ADD causing me to lose focus and drift off. I didn't even notice the dates.

[Simon Weiner]

Just wanted to apologize for being the offending idiot. I was using the search function, and found the thread about Weiner and wanted to put in a good word, as I have been fine dealing with them recently...my search wasn't even about Weiner...it's my ADD causing me to lose focus and drift off. I didn't even notice the dates.


Thanks for the compliment either way.:D :D

[Reedsplinter]

Just to demonstrate the flip side, though: an old thread surfaced just now -- who knows why? -- and it's full of fascinating stuff that is a delight to read. If it hadn't popped out, I'd never have known about it.

http://www.saxontheweb.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=18011

I had no urge to respond to it or add to it, but the fact that someone else did made it possible for me to check it out and learn a few things!

[SAXISMYAXE]

Just so the commentators in this thread don't think their suggestions are going unnoticed:

Many of the ideas here are good ones in theory, but from a practical angle just aren't possible with Vbulletin, or create more headaches for the staff... which we DO NOT want.:homework:

Those that can be put into practicable use will be looked into by the staff.

Keep the ideas coming.

[BigTooter]

Saxismyaxe,

I Really Think You Ought To Get Started Merging Those Commomn Threads!!

Steve

[SAXISMYAXE]

Saxismyaxe,

I Really Think You Ought To Get Started Merging Those Commomn Threads!!

Steve
Sorry, I have to, umm.......... wash my hair tonight. Yeah, that's the ticket!

[jazzbluescat]

Cull them instead. :)