SUGGESTION: Automatically lock dormant threads

[#1]

I really don't like the idea of totally blocking replying to old threads because as billnotben pointed out there are times when it is appropriate. What you would end up with is people starting new topics without any of the back history in the previous topic and the moderators having to merge the topics.

[#2]

@bobpullen, I saw that thread yesterday when I was looking into this. I already got the functionality for checking when the last reply was (as can be seen on the reply page). So it wouldn't be hard to do something like this

Basically we're just hiding the Reply buttons and putting a message at the top of the thread that says "This thread is now archived and closed to new comments. If you have a question please post a new topic."

We received no negative feedback following its introduction. We have had the auto-archive set at 6 months to be conversative but I think 3 months for a vibrant support community would be fine.

The only issue is that there is no visual queue to show that a thread has been 'locked' other than the absence of the reply buttons and a message at the top of the page.

I will have a think about this and look at giving this a trial, possibly only hide the reply buttons for normal forum users and let staff, mods, admins, superusers, established users and veterans be able to access the reply buttons (as they know not to post unless is absolutely needed.. I trust those groups of users at least to not post unless absolutely needed).

[#3]

I am saying nowt

[#4]

While talking with some of the community of Lithium developers, there is a way to set all threads to read only (locked) if they go over a certain amount of days of inactivity (I would set this to a very long number like 1-2 years old though). So its entirely possible and is done in a part of the code I havent looked into yet which will do some actions when a page is initialised. I will have a chat with Louisa and see if she would be happy to try this out. If we implement this, it should at least put a stop to new users doing the [search, click results, hit reply, ignore the warning box] flow that has been happening which is ressurecting old threads.

We can try this out for a while and if it causes issues, then we can revert it back.

[#5]

Thanks for going the extra mile and doing the 'digging' @jaread83.

Not always a simple decision to Lock any particular thread -  some are destined to be ongoing.  Having said that a great deal of problem based threads do become 'stale' as time passes and service upgrades made.

E.g. this one from this morning?  Speedy action by the Mods has now locked this thread, but it's a time consuming activity.

EDIT:  And here's a good example from this morning of a valid use of an old thread! 

[#6]

Would it be fair to say that 99 times out of 100 this is the reason?

If it becomes an issue would it be possible to block posting to old topics just for users with a low post count (i.e. based on their status)?

[#7]

And here is another example of a valid use of an "old" thread.

I think locking threads just because they are "more than x days old" is a bad idea IMHO.

[#8]

That does endorse my suggestion that only users with a certain ranking should be allowed to post to old topics.

[#9]

Good to see you posting again @Anotherone.  Your contributions have been missed

[#10]

I would have it so that 'established members' (a certain set of permissions I have set up for members who have a lot of posts and have been here for a while) would be able to interact with those locked threads... unfortunately this can't be done as then it gives those users the ability to post in ALL locked threads which defeats the point of locking it.

With what I am planning to do.. the flow goes a little something like this...

User visits a forum thread

Page init script checks the date of the last reply

If the last reply date is greater than X amount of years, lock the thread before the page has loaded, disabling the reply.

Display a warning at the top of the thread informing the user that the thread has be classified as archived and the discussion and fixes mentioned within the replies may no longer be valid so therefore has been locked from further replies.

Its a bit of an all or nothing situation as the page init doesn't support the checking of a users rank as it locks the thread for everyone.

The only other option is to create a script that will disable all of the reply buttons on a thread if a user is too low of a rank and the last reply was X amount of years old, everyone else (like established members, veterans, superusers, etc) would still be able to post though). Problems with this is that is isn't clear that the thread is locked out to lower rank members and also locks out those users who may need to post about an ongoing discussion.... also the fact that the 'last post date' would be reset when a user comes along and comments on an old thread.

For this we need to tread carefully as I wouldn't want to restrict anybodies freedom to post in an area which is relevant to them in its specifity.

I am rambling a little bit so apologies for the wall of text.

[#11]

Jack,

If something is of relevance in an old topic, I see no problem with starting a new thread linking to the aged one.

The problem we need to address is newbie me too posts on old stale topics. Invariably the me too is not actually the same problem ... even if symptoms appear to be similar.

[#12]

I'm not sure issue of newbies can really be addressed. Even if the rules are changed I doubt many actually read them!

Also, I doubt if many, if at all, would think of linking a new topic back to an old one even if a message requesting such was displayed at the time of posting.

Perhaps the current system of reporting such posts and letting the mods sort them is the better? (yes, I know I split a post recently that could have been linked back)

[#13]

@jaread83

Can I suggest a possible reason for a newbie posting in an aged thread

It is that when starting a new topic there is a drop down list of suggested topics which doesn't appear to be time filtered - could a 6 month limit be added to the suggested topics

[#14]

Although Jim's suggestion sounds reasonable it does then unfortunately eliminate the finding of a valid older thread. I do not like your primary idea @jaread83 as I have already said I'm against the locking of older threads just for the sake of it.

Perhaps the problem centres around the fact that the default search results appear to be sorted on "Best Match". A simpler solution would be to have the default as "Date" (newest first) which would hopefully encourage the "newbies" (as that seems to be where people suggest this problem stems) to post in a newer thread. (Also note that under >My Settings >Preferences >General - "Sort Topics" is set to "Time of most recent post" which obviously doesn't get applied to the default Search).

But changing the default search results in itself may not be sufficient ...............

@jaread83 Your "other option" suggestion of creating a script that only allows established members to post in an old script sounds better, and the "problem" could be addressed by modifying the "pop-up" message about the age of the thread, but perhaps only if it were possible for that message to have a button for "creating a new thread" with an in-built link to the old thread if a "non-established poster" believed the thread to be relevant (or come to that an establish poster may find that useful). Also note

---

Mav wrote:

Would it be possible to have a clickable warning box .................

Start a New Thread (which automatically opens a new thread page perhaps with the title already completed)

---

In any case, how much of a problem is this in reality? I think only the Mods - including retired ones  and perhaps some staff could comment on how much of a burden this actually is -

---

@Mav wrote:
Perhaps the current system of reporting such posts and letting the mods sort them is the better? (yes, I know I split a post recently that could have been linked back)

---

[#15]

---

@Anotherone wrote:

Although Jim's suggestion sounds reasonable it does then unfortunately eliminate the finding of a valid older thread.

---

You've answered that yourself in the following paragraph - that's what search is for!

@jaread83 In advanced search, the options for date are a day, a week, a month, a year. It's a hell of a jump from a month to a year! Could you add in 6 months in line with these discussions (or replace a year with 6 months)?

Following on from that is there any merit in making the default search period 6 months? Even from a basic search when you got the results it would show the 6 months with an x beside it in the shaded i box; the user could simply remove that to search further back if needed.