Inactive topics should be closed after a while.

[Rob1981]

(I mentioned this a while ago, but I feel the need to mention it again)


Why exactly aren't inactive topics (topics that haven't been posted in for 2 months or more, as an example), closed/locked? I've seen plenty of times where people "revive the dead" (post in a very old and inactive topic). I feel that's annoying, and they should've just made a new topic.


I believe the response I got when I first asked this was: "because it helps with searches" or something like that. I don't think that's very accurate at all. Old topics should be locked more often, to prevent reviving of the dead: which is disruptive. Obviously people don't care about inactive (otherwise it would be active).
_________________
http://strategywiki.org/wiki/Main_Page
Video game guides.

[Scar]

they use to automatically close themselves. They stopped it from doing that. I don't remember why, but im sure Trel has a valid reason for it that makes sense.

I don't why why a old topic being posted in really annoys you. Makes more sense then just creating a new one in my opinion becuase then duplicate topics would just get more annoying.

Maybe its just something you let annoy you.
_________________
http://www.damnidunno.com | http://www.mjhq.net | http://www.SnapCite.com

[LP-Trel]

[pharmer4]

i peronally think it is better to revive than to create new topics on a subject.

obviously there are cases for both.

A few of the topics i have started recently are about specific types of situations, and can be used for any post on that topic, ie moronic theives.

On the other hand, the current thread on abortion - it is starting a whole new discussion, and is served best by being in it's own thread.

The only thing that can be done is to have moderators with clear ideas on the best workings of the forum, and have them trawl the threads for dead weight and shut them if they are.
_________________
For Metal and Rock interviews and reviews, go to www.heavymetalnation.com - You can Contribute too if you want!
[img:d85b591d6d]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v400/pharmer4/pharmer4.jpg[/img:d85b591d6d]

[Scar]

Usually moderators only close topics if they have gone to hell, such as full of spam and off topic.

On smaller forums its best to close old topics to generate more content, but lifelesspeople isn't really new anymore
_________________
http://www.damnidunno.com | http://www.mjhq.net | http://www.SnapCite.com

[krt]

[LP-Trel]

[martin]

In my forum I don't close old topic unless they were Spam or forum announces (not all of them). The reason is that there are some topics which continue being useful and valid along the time. For example, can a topic like 'Is religion neccessary' expire? I don't think so

I don't like the fact of being repeated topics because there is a lot of information and opinions that got loss.

Finally, what about new memebers that would like to join and old dicussion? I think they have the right of doing it.. forums are for everybody: old and new memebers. They should have the same rights. And maybe they have something interesting to say.. I give everyone the chance of posting

It's not annoying for me to see an old topic in the first page because it has something new.
_________________
http://martin.com.uy

http://cafemontevideo.com

[Jorjel]

I also don't think that old topics should be closed. When I registered on the forum, I started looking for topics that interested me, since I couldn't "Get new posts". And I found a lot of topics that I had something to say about. It was easier for me to get the required pbpp to apply for hosting.

It is better to just have one topic, even if it was started a month ago or a year ago, than have duplicate threads. If I would look through the forums, I believe I would find some "old" topics to post in that didn't find in the past or hadn't had the time to post then.
_________________
The Prophet - By Kahlil Gibran
About Dancing Blog

[Jacky]

The old Auto Lock MOD which was used before used to lock only topics without polls, and caused many bugs if I am not wrong.

So moderators have to close the topics themselves again.

Even if the moderators don't, they should have the common sense that they should just create a new topic, and generally in most forums reviving an old topic is against the rules.
_________________
3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342
11706798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294
89549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867831652712019091456485669234603486104543266482133
9360726024

[gonz]

I usually post in new topics but when I don't have any place to post I go back to old topics and I sometimes find them more interesting to read because of other people's comments. So I think it is a good idea to keep old topics open for a while just until they get too old.

[spock]

[moridin]

Even though, I have just joined this forum, it is my general opinion that spam is the enemy, not time. If the so called bump contains intelligent and contributing content, I cannot see a reason as to prohibit posting in old threads.

[seren]

Thing is, if you just revive old topics, then everyone else has to trawl through pages of old stuff to remember what was said in the first place. Often, a topic is brought up again months later by someone new to this place. And it's interesting to see someone else's take on the topic. But I'd personally be less interested in reading it if it was just an old topic being taken out and given a dusting.