Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

[TheRapingDragon]

I wanted to post this in a locked thread but as I can't, I had to make a new topic, I wanted to address the locking of topics. I understand that old topics that are bumped are cause for locking, but there should definately be exemptions. I mean, look at this thread:

http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...=45849&page=18

In the last post, shade11 bumps it up from 22nd December to continue talking about the topic at hand, and, ignoring one stupid post, the thread is continued on in much the same way that it started, the thread was interesting and people would have now continued to post in it again, if it were not for Guido who instantly locked it for "bumping month old threads".

We are constantly telling people, "check to see if your thread has been made before so you don't make the same thread". Well, if someone did that and then posted in a month old topic then that's fine, because you know if they posted a new thread a bunch of members (probably myself included) would jump on them saying, "look, here is a link to a thread on the same subject, use the search function!"

Sure recently a two year old critical thinking topic has been bumped, yet it now has fresh debates, what is wrong with that? That one was left open strangely, I am surprised no moderator pounced on locking it.

All I am saying is how about you check the thread, see if the new posts are going anywhere, if the topic has gotten back on topic (no matter how long the post dates are apart) and then let the topic continue. I personally see no problem with half the threads locked, the other half are stupid bumps.

Also, this is not me being pro-bumping threads, this is me saying that if a thread is bumped and the talk is still back on-topic, then it is better than those people making new threads.

What do you say?

[nforcer06164]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I often see bumped threads I hadn't seen before that I'd like to post in as well, only to realize that it was locked for being old.

[Tasselfoot]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

for me at least... i'll leave it open if the bumped post is actually relavent to the topic and furthers discussion.

9 times out of 10, it doesn't.


PS - unlocked the thread in question

[rade0110]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I actually asked Shash this question in MP a couple days back since he was the only MOD I could get a hold of. Would it be more acceptable to just add a link to the previous thread (so as to not bump an old one) to a new one picking up where the previous left off? That was my idea on how to handle it....

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

But that's still making duplicate threads, and I don't see the point of that. If you can bump a topic with a valid post and then more people continue to post and the topic is still the same, then that thread should be allowed to continue, no matter how old the bump.

It should only be retarded bumps that are locked, those that are stupid, off-topic, or generally not worthy of bumping. By not worthy I would say something like an old news article, even if you bump it to talk about it, it seems stupid as that news article is out-of-date.

Tass - thanks for unlocking that, also, you have the right idea.

[Shashakiro]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I've always been discretionary about it in Brag...someone bumping one of their old threads to show some kind of improvement on an old score is perfectly fine with me.

Usually, though, it's some idiot bumping one of A0's old threads and going "lol arch0wl" or something...which is obviously retarded and very lockworthy.

[UberMario]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...ad.php?t=56499

prime example that just happened.

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...ad.php?t=56499

prime example that just happened.

What? Yes that is a prime example of a bump that deserves locking. And?

[UberMario]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

Oh so I saw it wrong?

Edit: Well, I didn't see in the thread that anything was solved or that the stickies should be read about these problems, so I thought it would have been a good continuer thread since it had no conclusion.

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I would believe so yes. My personal view on that thread:

- Original poster is looking to get into chat
- In 3 weeks time, any problems may be fixed, etc
- Bumping this topic to tell someone how to get into a chat three weeks later is not bump worthy because:

1. They would have made another thread / post if still not fixed.
2. The problem may have been fixed.

[Shashakiro]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

There really isn't any way to properly bump a thread in Bugreport, because Bugreport has no real discussion...it's one of the only forums where the blanket "don't bump old threads" rule applies every time, for the most part.

[the_unda_doggz]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I wanted to post this in a locked thread but as I can't, I had to make a new topic, I wanted to address the locking of topics. I understand that old topics that are bumped are cause for locking, but there should definately be exemptions. I mean, look at this thread:

http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...=45849&page=18

In the last post, shade11 bumps it up from 22nd December to continue talking about the topic at hand, and, ignoring one stupid post, the thread is continued on in much the same way that it started, the thread was interesting and people would have now continued to post in it again, if it were not for Guido who instantly locked it for "bumping month old threads".

We are constantly telling people, "check to see if your thread has been made before so you don't make the same thread". Well, if someone did that and then posted in a month old topic then that's fine, because you know if they posted a new thread a bunch of members (probably myself included) would jump on them saying, "look, here is a link to a thread on the same subject, use the search function!"

Sure recently a two year old critical thinking topic has been bumped, yet it now has fresh debates, what is wrong with that? That one was left open strangely, I am surprised no moderator pounced on locking it.

All I am saying is how about you check the thread, see if the new posts are going anywhere, if the topic has gotten back on topic (no matter how long the post dates are apart) and then let the topic continue. I personally see no problem with half the threads locked, the other half are stupid bumps.

Also, this is not me being pro-bumping threads, this is me saying that if a thread is bumped and the talk is still back on-topic, then it is better than those people making new threads.

What do you say?

I 100% agree! I had just posted in that thread and I was looking
forward to someone replying to my post and I was also looking
forward to reading other's posts. Thank you, TheRapingDragon for having
that thread opened back up. I mean, it wasn't a big bump. Only a couple of weeks. =.=

[Rubin0]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I was actually thinking the same thing about the topic that you mentioned, but I'm new so I didn't want to start trouble. I posted in it as soon as I saw it, not realizing that it was an older thread. It seems like something that can go on and on just because people always have something new to add to it and there are always new people to post in it.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

I agree with the Raping Dragon.

Im for locking 2 year old threads about soda or something like that but when their only a couple of months about, and go right back on subject, then keep them open. You guys should have a auto-lock option, were if a thread doesnt have a new post in one year then it's locked. That will help alot.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Locking "old" threads (aimed at Moderators)

The way I see it, threads die for a reason. Bumping a three- or four-week old thread to get in what you neglected to do three or four weeks ago would keep a gazillion relatively dead threads on the front page of CC.

I would MUCH rather see a thread recreated than see an old one bumped. That way, the original thread can be linked for reference to anyone who wants to see the responses of those who don't want to repost the same thing, anyone who wants to repost can, and it's also a very living thread, the kind that should be up top. Also, if nobody wants to post, it dies as quickly as the bumped one would, but it doesn't have any of the "nice bump" posts.

Another issue is the type of thread that's bumped. The problem with the thread you linked is that the bump doesn't stimulate discussion in the slightest. It gives no reason for the people who have already posted to go and post again. That's what I consider stimulating discussion (and thus justifying a bump). This is why bumped threads in CT are more likely to live. Also because it's not the liveliest forum and almost any discussion is valuable. The very purpose of CT is to have threads that stimulate discussion.

When I consider the thread I locked, I think of a thread titled "Post a picture of your car". People post all their cars and then the thread dies. Three weeks later, somebody comes and posts their car. Whoopee. Does it further the point of the thread? Yes. Was the bump at all useful to anyone else? No, it only served as a "Hey! Don't forget about meeee!" post.

Dead threads die for a reason, and that's because nobody wants to talk about them anymore. If you just missed the thread, tough beans. Just wait a while then recreate another one; it's not going to go anywhere, and after the old one is forgotten you might have more interest in a second one. But if an old one is bumped, everyone is reminded of it and how the thread was over, but this one guy just had to get his post in.

It's already in the rules that it's okay to bump a thread if you have something worthwhile to contribute. Updates to news stories or historical accounts or a new way to look at a debate or something like that. Those are worthwhile.

But that was a list thread. No discussion involved, just post a list of something. Those threads are even banned at CAD because of how empty they are. Perfectly acceptable here, but by virtue of the type of thread that it was there's pretty much no way that it could legitimately be bumped.

I just have a stricter interpretation of what a worthwhile bump is.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com