Locking old threads? Does it even matter?

PennKev

PennKev

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
3,286
Is there any capability to auto lock threads once they reach a certain age without any recent additions?

It really seems like it's become common for threads to be resurrected after a long period with no new additions to them. I don't know how everyone else feels but I find this a bit confusing as I usually assume that threads near the top of the listing are current, or at least have been a long running but continuous conversation. The recent resurrection of the trout stocking numbers thread is a good example. If you read it from start to finish such a thread might leave the reader with inaccurate dates and numbers since most of the thread is a year old. (Not saying that is the case, just a possibility)

If a thread has been dead for a year, I feel that it's OK for a new one of similar topic to be started.

Maybe this is a matter of perception as I've noticed the same phenomenon on a couple other online forums in the past couple years and that is making it seem to me that it happens more than it actually does.

Kev
 
Added to my calendar to resurrect this thread in a few years...

I tend to agree. I start reading something, feel a case of deja vu and then notice that the date is from a year or more ago. And so I'm actually re-reading some of the threads. Was puzzled recently when I saw a banned forum member post and then realized it's 2024, not 2023..
 
I noticed some old threads coming back too. After reading a few posts, you realize it's old news.
 
I don't mind it. New members join all the time. If they open a new thread rather than resurrect an old one that made them want to post or ask something, without the OP, you'll wonder what the heck is this guy talking about. Or the poor guy is young to have to paraphrase an entire discussion. If he just adds to an old post, a lot of people will remember thst discussion and be able to answer.

It also might be a lot ofcwork to go pick through older topics just to close them. I don't see the advantage.
 
I'm OK with it because it often brings up interesting topics.

It can be slightly confusing at first, then you notice the date, or someone points out that it's an old thread.
 
I try to find an old thread to keep from opening a new and redundant one. Should we not be doing that?
 
I think keeping the old threads active, is no worse than starting a stocked or wild thread every week.
 
So…We tell new folks to use the search feature, and that their question or topic has likely been discussed before and there’s likely already some good info on a given topic out there, which is usually true. Then they do, and find a thread that interests them, that might be a couple years, or more, old. Then they make a post in it with some additional questions. Then we tell them to start a new thread. Makes sense to me.

Edit: I imagine this is a common discussion amongst forum admins. I have seen forums that auto lock threads after a certain period of dormancy. I’d have to imagine this forum software has that capability. But pros and cons to implementing it clearly.
 
Good question.

The old site did not have that feature so it was never an option. The new site, I'm very sure does, but I have not looked at what we can or can't do.

I'm not opposed to the idea if it's as easy I think it might be. It's really up to the forum and mods as far as I'm concerned.

Both points for and against looking threads are valid.

I don't go to many other forums. Is this a common practice elsewhere?

cc: @afishinado @Dave_W @JackM @Maurice
 
Last edited:
Resurrecting old threads has happened a few times recently and at a much more rapid pace than in the past, That might just be an unusual circumstance though, so I wouldn’t recommend worrying about addressing it unless the pace continues. Maybe when trout season starts in five weeks thoughts will go more to actual fishing and less to rehash of assorted past topics.
 
Last edited:
Good question.

The old site did not have that feature so it was never an option. The new site, I'm very sure does, but I have not looked at what we can or can't do.

I'm not opposed to the idea if it's as easy I think it might be. It's really up to the forum and mods as far as I'm concerned.

Both points for and against looking threads are valid.

I don't go to many other forums. Is this a common practice elsewhere?

cc: @afishinado @Dave_W @JackM @Maurice
In my experience it's quite rare to lock older threads.

In my opinion, the older thread with any prior information is more valuable than a new thread with one post seeking information. We're all here to learn and share, right?
 
Curious what there is to be gained by locking old posts? Seems like if we force members to start a new one, it is much more likely that they will repeat the same things that are already answered. Since they can’t scroll up and see what has already been discussed. Also seems a shame to bury so much great information. It’s like writing a book then getting rid of it and starting over. To rewrite the same book. But instead of 10 pages of information, now it only has one. Just my opinion. Like I said I’m not sure what there is to be gained from locking them. But there is certainly a lot of really great information to be lost.

It would also be a shame to miss out on some of the old funny posts. I’m still waiting for Mkern to drink a few beers and go into more detail about his brook trout Shaq theory.
 
Curious what there is to be gained by locking old posts? Seems like if we force members to start a new one, it is much more likely that they will repeat the same things that are already answered. Since they can’t scroll up and see what has already been discussed. Also seems a shame to bury so much great information. It’s like writing a book then getting rid of it and starting over. To rewrite the same book. But instead of 10 pages of information, now it only has one. Just my opinion. Like I said I’m not sure what there is to be gained from locking them. But there is certainly a lot of really great information to be lost.

It would also be a shame to miss out on some of the old funny posts. I’m still waiting for Mkern to drink a few beers and go into more detail about his brook trout Shaq theory.
Agree. Makes perfect sense to me. No constructive reason to lock old threads. I haven't seen it often enough for it to be a real problem.
 
Last edited:
Curious what there is to be gained by locking old posts? Seems like if we force members to start a new one, it is much more likely that they will repeat the same things that are already answered. Since they can’t scroll up and see what has already been discussed. Also seems a shame to bury so much great information. It’s like writing a book then getting rid of it and starting over. To rewrite the same book. But instead of 10 pages of information, now it only has one. Just my opinion. Like I said I’m not sure what there is to be gained from locking them. But there is certainly a lot of really great information to be lost.

It would also be a shame to miss out on some of the old funny posts. I’m still waiting for Mkern to drink a few beers and go into more detail about his brook trout Shaq theory.
Dear 5footfenwick,

I agree with you as well. Sometimes looking back brings new information or insights. Plus, for me at least, it's fun to see responses to posts from former members, if only to recall people who I knew from the board years ago who have since moved on, or sadly, departed.

I visit messages boards for many of my hobbies. In many cases at other sites an old post is resurrected, and I learn what was formerly common knowledge about something that is a new to me thing. I'm a film camera hobbyist and what I have learned from old posts that I wouldn't have even thought to search for has given me knowledge about cameras and accessories that I wouldn't have even thought to ask about. And I don't look like a dufus for being the one to resurrect that thread, which is fine by me! ;)

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)
 
Personally, I like the old information... with periodic updates... The only drawback I can see is that some embedded links won't work anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRB
Personally, I like the old information... with periodic updates... The only drawback I can see is that some embedded links won't work anymore.
I too am in favor of not locking the old posts. A lot of very good info and sometimes adding is much better than rewriting a post going the wrong way, along with remembering lost posters who have moved on with the passing of time.
Just my 2 cents.
 
I have long been in favor of locking threads older than a year.

In the past, it was often bots that refreshed old threads. This has improved but I still think that refreshing old threads does more harm than good.
 
Back
Top