Disabling Posts to Old Topics

[Cliff_Johns]

I just had this urge to mark my calandar so I could reply to this post in 8 months saying, "I agree."

Cliff


OK, so this post didn't add anything. I'm trying to change, really I am.

Well, OK, I'm not trying very hard.

 

[California]

Muhammad's welcome PM to each new member has good advice on how, and what, to post. I suggest a line discouraging "bumping" should be added.

In fact the moderators might want to PM that Welcome to anyone if it seems to be needed.

 

[slowzuki]

I like it the way it is, I like it when people dig up posts I haven't seen in long time. The little blue numbers tell me how many posts there have been since I last read it anyways. Many of them I haven't read at all and I find it interesting.

 

[DocHeb]

It could fit easily in a section that I propose be called "Courtesy". Sort of a "rules of engagement", to help the newcomers to our conversations. I believe it should be under the FAQ since each new member will hopefully read them at least once.

For example:

* Don't resurrect old threads unless there is something substansive you wish to add, or you wish to inform readers of the outcome of the subject. Of course, there are no absolute rules against this practice.

* Mild tangents to threads can be entertaining and informative, but please do not hijack threads to have your own questions answered. Start a new thread. That said, there is a lot of leeway in this, and some of the more interesting threads morph out of unrelated topics.

* Please do at least a couple searches before asking a question. Refer to the results of your searches when asking your question, so we can know how the question can be answered.

* Typing in all capitals is a written form of shouting. Please avoid this practice, unless, of course, you are shouting.

I'm sure there are other items that could be included. We could solicit input from other members, or just do a search of Gatorboy's past corrections and comments.

No offense, of course. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[JerryG]

<font color="blue">I'm sure there are other items that could be included. </font>
Long web links /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif

 

[AndyM]

<font color="blue"> I'm sure there are other items that could be included. </font>

inline photos that are wider than the screen. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

[DocHeb]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I'm sure there are other items that could be included. )</font>

* Please don't attach pictures over 800x600 pixels, or embed them as images in your post. Include a description of how to use Ifran (sp?) to downsize picture file sizes.

 

[Gatorboy]

<font color="blue"> ... or just do a search of Gatorboy's past corrections and comments. </font>

That's one of the best ideas I've heard in a long time! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[MikePA]

It's my observation there are 2 types of topics in a FAQ;

1. Topics that tell people how to do things.
2. Topics that define rules of behavior and forum etiquette.

Most, if not all, people benefit from Item 1 topics.

Most, but not all, people do not need to be told Item 2 topics. Those that do need to be told, wont follow them anyway. /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif They always have a 'good' reason for violating board etiquette, e.g., they weren't 'bumping', the post they added to a 6 month old thread really did have value. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

I vote for leaving things the way they are. With an 'ignore filter' (based on other sites where I've seen this feature) you still see that someone on your 'ignore list' has made a post, you just can't see their message (without a bunch of steps). Plus, you obviously see what their messaqe is if someone else quotes them. All in all, the 'cost' of ignore filter probably outweighs it's value, particularly for a site that has a community of users that are as well behaved as those in TBN-ville. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue"> I vote for leaving things the way they are. </font>

Me too...

One of life's rules comes to mind at the same time:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[AndyMA]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( <font color="blue"> I think it would be a good idea to disable replying to posts after a certain time period, maybe 60 days. </font>

I don't think this is a good idea. )</font>

Neither do I. Keep the posts open for ever. Another thought, keep the Editing option open for about 3 days. Many times I reread one of my posts and notice spelling errors. Then find that I can't fix them. Usually happens just after the time to edit has expired.

Andy

 

[LBrown59]

an idea of "locking" threads (from additional posting) after a certain period (x months)
=============
The problem with this is it prevents someone with new ideas or solutions from passing on the information.
Also an old thread don't have to contain new info to be important to someone.
Burying old threads deprives newcomers of seeing info that may be of benefit to them.
Burying old threads can also result in a solution never being found.
Burying old threads causes scattered information which is detrimental to newbies.
Burying old threads can drastically reduce the exchange of ideas and solutions available.
Burying old threads favors older members over newer members.
Bringing older threads to the front causes far less harm than does griping about them making an appearance.

If I don't want to read something I simply don't read it.
I don't need and ignore button for that

PS
Just because you open a thread that don't mean you have to read it.

 

[LBrown59]

<font color="blue">We have a user now that likes to dredge up old posts after many months without adding any real value.</font>

Value as determined by who? /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif

twabscs

EDIT: fixed the font, removed bad brackets and fixed the color call

 

[RobS]

Buried old threads are available to everyone via the search feature at the top of the screen. Common "netiquette" sense is to keep old threads buried unless there is new, useful and relevant information to add /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[JerryG]

<font color="blue">Common "netiquette" sense is to keep old threads buried unless there is new, useful and relevant information to add </font>
I think that is the problem. Some bring them back with out any useful information being added.

 

[MikePA]

<font color="blue"> Common "netiquette" </font>
Common - Of or relating to the community as a whole
etiquette - rules governing socially acceptable behavior

In most communities, newcomers learn what socially acceptable behavior is by observing how longer term citizens of that community behave. Most, but not all, newcomers are eventually assimilated into the community, some quickly, others take longer. The ones that can't, or wont, learn what socially acceptable behavior is, typically leave for communities that have behavior norms they are more compatible with. If they remain, they are typically ostracized/ignored. Jane Goodall did fascinating studies of gorilla communities where this was observed.

TBN, like any other community, has its own socially acceptable behavior. However, since we're a virtual community, we do not have physical or verbal behaviors. Rather, TBNs behavior norms have to do with how messages are formatted, appropriate thread topics, etc., which are easier to observe, than the sometimes subtle behaviors in a physical community so assimilation is usually, but not always, quicker.

 

[txdon]

I have learned to look at the original post date when LB59 post. The problem is sometimes other people post after him and I miss that he has open an old thread. LB59 states that he is adding information. Sometimes he is and sometimes he is not. (who is mowing in January besides Daedong?) After being here a while I have noticed people come and go and LB59 sometimes is responding to someone who is no longer posting. LB59 some of the information you have to share would benefit us most in a new post, that way all information and posters are current.
Of course this is my opinion only, I just wish I wish, I wish...

The date of the original post would be on the Main Index page.

 

[OkeeDon]

I believe the date of the original used to be on the main index page; somewhere along the way as the guys behind this site worked their magic and made it faster, they also lost that information. The way I navigate the site, the original date is more valuable to me than the date of the last post, so I join in your wish.

To add to MikePA's excellent analysis, there are also some folks who deliberately do NOT want to be assimilated. They are starved for attention, and will garner that attention in any way they can, even by negative or undesirable actions. What is important to them is the attention, not whether it is an accolade. They have discovered, in the process of thousands upon thousands of posts, that negative behavior will result in them becoming "famous", or more approriately infamous, faster than appropriate behavior. There is little one can do with such individuals except ignore them or, in a moderated forum like this, ban them or delete all of their posts if they become too obnoxious or begin to upset too many people.

 

[DUMBDOG]

Don

The knowledge and information that one can get from this site never ceases to amaze me, even a thread such as this. I did a web search, but it was no help, had to get out a dictionary to look up the meaning of a word. Sure envy you guys with the power of usuage of the English language.

 

[MossRoad]

<font color="blue"> had to get out a dictionary to look up the meaning of a word </font>

That makes you a smart dog /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif