test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Closing "Ancient" threads

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
So over the last two days I've seen 3 of my threads closed because we were making discussion on threads "many months old" and informend I should start a new thread on the subject. So I went through all the ToS, user guidelines, forum rules and whatever else I could find to see where it is advised when a thread is "too old."

I found reference that posting the same thing multiple times is a violation. So why close a post a tell the OP to make a new post on the same topic. Devs, GMs and Mods I apologize if I am out of place here and I will accept the consequences of my actions here but it doesn't make sense IMO.

If a thread is generating new discussion why close it simply because it's origin is from a few months ago? Especially if a repost could be considered a violation.

/end rant
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    As I understand it, part of the logic (from what's been said on the forums) is that given how fast the game changes, a several months-old thread my become obsolete and inaccurate very quickly, and they'd much rather see the new discussion start from current information and state of play, rather than have to go through all the old info to find the stuff that's up to date. I've lost count of the number of ship/skill build threads I've trawled through that have been rendered inaccurate by game and power changes.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I don't know why the mods are stepping up out of no where. Maybe the new CEO is to blame.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I'm not bothered by the moderation efforts - generally they tend to be understandable - I just wish that moderation posts didn't show up in the Dev Tracker "forum".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    OttoVonCat wrote: »
    I don't know why the mods are stepping up out of no where. Maybe the new CEO is to blame.

    LMAO! Now that is funny.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    OP brings up a good point. Why not just archive old posts that shouldn't be re-opened? It's like solving the zombie apocalypse by killing the virus at its source.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    OP brings up a good point. Why not just archive old posts that shouldn't be re-opened? It's like solving the zombie apocalypse by killing the virus at its source.

    The only way they could do that is to have some sort of automated program that locks threads after they reach a certain age. I'm not sure they have the forum tech for that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The only way they could do that is to have some sort of automated program that locks threads after they reach a certain age. I'm not sure they have the forum tech for that.

    The don't need the tech....they have 'mod slave labor'.:D


    To the OP......just stay away from threads over 4 weeks old,anything in the fridge that old will give you a tummy ache.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    SHARKFORCE wrote: »
    The don't need the tech....they have 'mod slave labor'.:D

    No, they dont. This specific board alone has 32,000+ threads in it. They do not have the staff to track the ages of all of them.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Tragamite wrote: »
    So over the last two days I've seen 3 of my threads closed because we were making discussion on threads "many months old" and informend I should start a new thread on the subject. So I went through all the ToS, user guidelines, forum rules and whatever else I could find to see where it is advised when a thread is "too old."

    I found reference that posting the same thing multiple times is a violation. So why close a post a tell the OP to make a new post on the same topic. Devs, GMs and Mods I apologize if I am out of place here and I will accept the consequences of my actions here but it doesn't make sense IMO.

    If a thread is generating new discussion why close it simply because it's origin is from a few months ago? Especially if a repost could be considered a violation.

    /end rant

    You are absolutely correct, multiple threads of the same topic is a forum violation, as you have pointed out. Many people do that, (make multiple posts), randomly and are not called out by moderators for doing so. Then when Moderators miss the connections, the one who points out the infraction is too often called a TROLL, or a HARASSER by those that do the violation.

    If Moderators do close a thread that is old, or needs a new start for another reason, they should POST what that reason or justification is. At least then the OP has a clear understanding of why the need for a duplicate thread name is necessary.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    No, they dont. This specific board alone has 32,000+ threads in it. They do not have the staff to track the ages of all of them.

    I'm sure no company has that many staff, and if they did, would they do it anyway, I'd get bored out of my mind after 5 minutes doing that job :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    LMAO! Now that is funny.

    why? don't you think when someone gets a new boss they are going to try harder to make it look like they do more or they could have been order to step it up from the big man. From CEO to the Devs to the Mods.

    You really think the Devs would really tell us what they think of their CEO (boss) on their own company's forum and risk getting into problems with themselves or with the game? What happens behind these forums could be very different than what they make us believe.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    No, they dont. This specific board alone has 32,000+ threads in it. They do not have the staff to track the ages of all of them.

    You're right...mods are gods on these forums.:eek:

    What kind of sacrifice do we need to appease these angry mod gods?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Tragamite wrote: »
    If a thread is generating new discussion why close it simply because it's origin is from a few months ago? Especially if a repost could be considered a violation.

    because it clutters up the forums and makes it very hard to gather accurate feedback if 90% of the thread is either out of date, or has people responding to issues already dealt with or to people who have moved on.

    opening new threads is the best way to keep the information and feedback up-to-date and relevant. if they let people start bring back old threads the place would become a mess of threads from all over the place.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    OttoVonCat wrote: »
    why? don't you think when someone gets a new boss they are going to try harder to make it look like they do more or they could have been order to step it up from the big man. From CEO to the Devs to the Mods.

    You really think the Devs would really tell us what they think of their CEO (boss) on their own company's forum and risk getting into problems with themselves or with the game? What happens behind these forums could be very different than what they make us believe.

    You must have been gone from the forums for a LONG time then as many times a week since STOP began; the Forum mods have been closing 'necro' and duplicate threads multiple times a week. It'sdefinitely NOT something they just started doing recently by any stretch of the imagination. They've done this from day one.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    This forum software (vBulletin) is more than capable of automatically archiving threads, automatically closing "old" threads, or doing any combination of those things to keep the forums "clean." Among many dozens of similar functions.

    I do think it's a little odd to close legitimate threads that are being actively discussed, especially if the situation discussed has not changed from the original post. Thread "necromancy" needs to be clearly defined for us poor peons that don't want to get into trouble for making a duplicate thread.

    Since, you know, you're either violating forum rules by making a fresh thread or violating someones arbitrary limitations on necromancy by resurrecting an old thread for discussion.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    This forum software (vBulletin) is more than capable of automatically archiving threads, automatically closing "old" threads, or doing any combination of those things to keep the forums "clean." Among many dozens of similar functions.
    I think he's right here. There should be display options that show only threads posted in within a certain time period. The mods I would think, would be able to set the default at a month or so, so that dead threads addressing issues and game mechanics that have already changed, aren't posted in. One could always change their display options for longer periods of threads to display, but they would have to do it manually, usually with a pull down menu at the bottom of the page.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    If a thread has gone months without a reply, then it's a necro.

    If the thread was started a long time ago but has consistently had input since it was created, then it should stay.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    If a thread has gone months without a reply, then it's a necro.

    If the thread was started a long time ago but has consistently had input since it was created, then it should stay.

    Right. It really doesnt matter when the thread was started, it matters when the last reply was.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Anyone who's ever run b-boards knows you can easily have posts older than a certain date be automatically deleted or closed...it's a simple option. You just click the box.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    SHARKFORCE wrote: »
    What kind of sacrifice do we need to appease these angry mod gods?
    In my case, french hot chocolate works miracles. ;)
    Ragnavald wrote:
    As I understand it, part of the logic (from what's been said on the forums) is that given how fast the game changes, a several months-old thread my become obsolete and inaccurate very quickly, and they'd much rather see the new discussion start from current information and state of play, rather than have to go through all the old info to find the stuff that's up to date. I've lost count of the number of ship/skill build threads I've trawled through that have been rendered inaccurate by game and power changes.
    This is pretty much the reason why and was stated as such previously, too. At the speed our Devs work, something that goes old goes old fast. A thread a couple of months back of people asking if we could have more shuttle pets to which a poster bumps it up going "/signed, I want shuttle pets nao!" digs up old info from a time when we didn't have shuttles in the C-Store, in missions and so on. A new player stumbling over it may get confused and confused people get angry.

    Which leads to:
    If a thread has gone months without a reply, then it's a necro.

    If the thread was started a long time ago but has consistently had input since it was created, then it should stay.
    Darren is right on the money there. We have a few Threadnoughts that are huge and old which still have running issues and we won't shut them down because new info on an old issue still is valid. You can find a few of these in the tech forums where we are hunting ATI Graphics issues. ...which is also the reason why threads on our forums do not have a set-in-stone expiration date after the thread was started.
    We also have had some running threads which after a while went away from the topic of the original thread which got closed. And we have had threads that ran for months, then dropped off and suddenly got rebooted that get closed.


    In general, we do expect folks to check the thread they stumble upon. If it is older than 4ish; 5ish weeks (plus minus a couple of days ((not weeks!)) ), chances are you should start a new thread. Especially if the issue is now different than the first and last couple of posts show it to be.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    If a thread has gone months without a reply, then it's a necro.

    If the thread was started a long time ago but has consistently had input since it was created, then it should stay.

    I dissagree, you currently have a post that has been going on forever. Although you update the OP reguarly it should now be close and you start a new post carrying on your work... just so you dont have the hundreds of pages that are out of date.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Just an stolen idea, but CCP uses a 90day lock period on their EVE online forums, So treads are auto locked if there has been no post in them for 90 days.

    Could help here.

    Beside that, necros are just cofnussing imo.
Sign In or Register to comment.