I wonder I use some mods of STO advanced (the guy took his site down, go check nothing there any more) like colourful LCARs and some old ones regarding sector space which no longer work anyway because cryptic made a good fix of that.
Is that a problem just on the side of using them? not sure if policy changed on that subject as before it was not supported and if you game crashed you where to blame. If it is no longer allowed I am going to have a hard time finding them all.
Except you have been much more stringent in moderation of late, and its highly noticeable. Like I said before, you're the most noticeable name on the dev tracker now, and far too many of them are moderation notices.
Even if they are 100% legit rulebreakers, it just wears thin and it certain gives the appearance of being overly active in moderation.
Overly-burdensome rules are easy to ignore if they aren't heavily enforced, even if they're in a sticky-post.
Now they are being enforced, and they are "squeaky" and we're being "squeaky" back and giving you feedback.
As in all things, its up to you guys how you deal with the feedback.
and I will disagree in that. While I appreciate and understand what you are saying, many on the forums were posting with very little regard or manners, or in a respectful approach to each other. You simply see wishstone a touch more because she is doing her job, I see alot more posts by the other GM's who simply moderate and do not write anything except to the individual they moderate based on the same rules that have existed.
Even me myself have let my temper get the best of me sometimes, yet some are just flagrant in how they respond to others.
I for one want to applaud Wishstone, Storm, and the other mods for getting a handle on the forums. That is all I see, people doing their jobs, based on the agreements we all accepted to post in their private forums.
Posting Cheats, Hacks, Trojan Horses, or Malicious Programs 20 points
You may not create posts and/or private messages that allude to, contain language, comments, references, links, symbols, terms and/or imagery about and/or promote and/or otherwise support, in any manner whether directly or indirectly, cheats, hacks, cracks and/or malicious viruses/programs (e.g., keyloggers, Trojan horses, websites or files that take control of another persons computer, etc.).
What exactly does this mean?
...eep... You may be over thinking this. Most of these rules are not to be taken to sit down and meditate on them; we tried our best to make them brief and easy to understand. Look at it this way:
You find out that by doing something in the game that cannot possibly have been an intended game design, you are able to do something else that normally is not possible.
Say: Suddenly you realize that if you feed your tribble 50 cups of hot chocolate in 30 seconds; your tribble breaks and can be equipped in any slot. This way you can even equip it as armor and suddenly you have a very fluffy pullover. This tribble armor also makes you invulnerable.
That sounds like it should not happen, right?
So, we'd ask you to NOT post it on the forums. This has a few reasons, for example: Folks can get in trouble. Someone will be curious and use this in PvP "just to try it out" or "just to test it". And when a GM comes and bans them, their defense will be "But that is unfair, people were talking about it on the forums, I thought it was okay!!"
Not just that, but due to this posting, a LOT of people suddenly know about it and now everyone is doing it. And perhaps fixing the problem isn't done easily, so now, for weeks, we either remove tribbles from the game or people run around exploiting. All because someone posted about it.
What to do instead?
Write a bug report. If this is what you feel could even break the game, make extra sure and send a community ticket with the ticket number of your bug report and ask us to please have QA look at this as soon as possible.
I wonder I use some mods of STO advanced (the guy took his site down, go check nothing there any more) like colourful LCARs and some old ones regarding sector space which no longer work anyway because cryptic made a good fix of that.
I'll always try to give you the answer you can quote me with in any regard and go with safely. When I say something, I try to base it on our EULA, TOS or what I hear directly from Devs and CS. This is what you can find in the EULA:
3.6 use cheats, automation software (bots), hacks, mods or any other unauthorized third-party software designed to modify the Star Trek Online experience;
Due to this wording I would always suggest to players to not change anything in the game files; add something to the game files that did not come through a patcher from us directly or similar. The reason I say it like this is roughly 7 years of working the CS side of a number of MMOs. Some allowed such modifications and always make clear in the EULA what they allow and when.
Since our wording is the way it is my quotable comment on changing anything in the game is: Since it is against the EULA, it is fully at your own risk. You may get in trouble for it, so I cannot tell you that you may do so. (Because I kinda like you guys and would prefer if you stick around, see? )
So just to clarify are we allowed to repost stuff from dstahl's twitter feed?
Totally! If Dan tweeted it, he decided it can go to the public. If that was in error, you guys are not the ones who'll get in trouble. What comes through Dan's, Stormies' or my own TweetFeed is up for grabs.
Thank you for answering my initial questions StormShade, I have just a few more.
1) I started a thread where I review Foundry missions and then post the review on the forums. I only review a mission on the request of the author, and I've specifically stated in my OP that my reviews will be very critical.
So if I criticize someone's mission - NOT THE PERSON, THE MISSION - am I in danger of violating the forum rules?
2) Can we please finally get an official ruling on whether these words are considered insults by the moderation staff: noob, carebear, feddybear, fedbear?
3) Does the "Hate Speech" section also apply to people who post derogatory stuff about Americans? I've seen a lot of "Americans are dumb/fat/lazy/uneducated" on the forums and I'd like an official statement on whether this is allowed or not.
4) Is it really going to be against the rules to write a single word, or short phrase, of Klingon on the official forums of Star Trek Online? How about in the Klingon subforum?
Say: Suddenly you realize that if you feed your tribble 50 cups of hot chocolate in 30 seconds; your tribble breaks and can be equipped in any slot. This way you can even equip it as armor and suddenly you have a very fluffy pullover. This tribble armor also makes you invulnerable.
That sounds like it should not happen, right?
A fluffy tribble fur pullover should totally happen.
Thank you for answering my initial questions StormShade, I have just a few more.
1) I started a thread where I review Foundry missions and then post the review on the forums. I only review a mission on the request of the author, and I've specifically stated in my OP that my reviews will be very critical.
So if I criticize someone's mission - NOT THE PERSON, THE MISSION - am I in danger of violating the forum rules?
4) Is it really going to be against the rules to write a single word, or short phrase, of Klingon on the official forums of Star Trek Online? How about in the Klingon subforum?
I can't imagine that being against the rules. I mean I wouldn't take offense to anyone being critical of my mission. Kinda the point of critics, actually. Anyone who got upset over it is being way to sensitive.
You are Kidding!! Seriously!? Why the heck is that against the rules??! I couldn't say Qapla' to awesome thread? Or g'day't, or Khest'n, or nuqDaq ta' SoH pol yuch?
Here are some items I just read in the Rules that I have questions about.
"1. Creation of First! posts.
.........
2. Creating Duplicate Threads
(I have Numbered them for ease of Transition here.)
1. Creation of First Posts?? What is that saying, that a Post can not be put in place unless that subject is already active?? What does the word First as used here Mean?
2. Creation of Duplicate Threads. Does this basically mean that people should do a Really Thorough Search before starting a thread, or maybe face disciplinary process for duplicating some one else's previous post? or just their own? (I have seen this one done by a couple of people across Forum Sections, and in a single section.)
Say: Suddenly you realize that if you feed your tribble 50 cups of hot chocolate in 30 seconds; your tribble breaks and can be equipped in any slot. This way you can even equip it as armor and suddenly you have a very fluffy pullover. This tribble armor also makes you invulnerable.
That sounds like it should not happen, right?
Invunerable tribble jumpers should SO happen ^_^
yeah ok maybe not, but as examples go, thats as awesome as playable horta captains
1) I started a thread where I review Foundry missions and then post the review on the forums. I only review a mission on the request of the author, and I've specifically stated in my OP that my reviews will be very critical.
So if I criticize someone's mission - NOT THE PERSON, THE MISSION - am I in danger of violating the forum rules?
being the recipient of Peregrine Falcon's first official one-star review i would be upset if the forum rules came down hard on the idea. having an honest and critical review given is actually very helpful if one's ego allows it and in my case has prompted me to work harder at improving my own work.
while personal attacks do need to be covered, i dont think critical review, even if harsh, should be covered unless it goes into personal attacks.
if you feed your tribble 50 cups of hot chocolate in 30 seconds; your tribble breaks and can be equipped in any slot. This way you can even equip it as armor and suddenly you have a very fluffy pullover. This tribble armor also makes you invulnerable.
Thank you for answering my initial questions StormShade, I have just a few more.
3) Does the "Hate Speech" section also apply to people who post derogatory stuff about Americans? I've seen a lot of "Americans are dumb/fat/lazy/uneducated" on the forums and I'd like an official statement on whether this is allowed or not.
Would you be surprised if I told you that the majority of the people posting such comments are actually American?
Here are some items I just read in the Rules that I have questions about.
"1. Creation of First! posts.
.........
2. Creating Duplicate Threads
(I have Numbered them for ease of Transition here.)
1. Creation of First Posts?? What is that saying, that a Post can not be put in place unless that subject is already active?? What does the word First as used here Mean?
2. Creation of Duplicate Threads. Does this basically mean that people should do a Really Thorough Search before starting a thread, or maybe face disciplinary process for duplicating some one else's previous post? or just their own? (I have seen this one done by a couple of people across Forum Sections, and in a single section.)
1) The "first" post is referring to the creation of reply to an OP, whereby it is the first reply and usually only contains that word (i.e. First). It is to denote a competive attempt of a post with no real content.
2) Only an assumption here, so take it as you see fit. These are duplicate threads from the same original poster, usually in different sections of the forum to attempt a shotgun way of either obtaining an answer or to relay information, usually negative. If it was just the duplication of similar threads, then this rule might also conflict with the 30 day old thread revival rule.
Thanks wishstone, I guess I keep using the LCARS mod at my own risk than, I simply cannot stand the blue LCARS in game, it gives me a headache. This because it is so dark and darker games tend to give me a headache, beside I been using it for many months and I wouldn't even remember which file it was and with the site down I cannot download to check the file and take it out. (and a complete reinstall would take the better part of 2 days, I can only download at 850Kb/s)
Beside this, I wish there was a way for infractions to go away, I mean surely after a year one can be cleaned of them.
1) The "first" post is referring to the creation of reply to an OP, whereby it is the first reply and usually only contains that word (i.e. First). It is to denote a competive attempt of a post with no real content.
So, initially like Bumping, with no extra content being added? Done by players wanting to get the total Post Count up??
2) Only an assumption here, so take it as you see fit. These are duplicate threads from the same original poster, usually in different sections of the forum to attempt a shotgun way of either obtaining an answer or to relay information, usually negative. If it was just the duplication of similar threads, then this rule might also conflict with the 30 day old thread revival rule.
There were 3 of these in a two day period, with no other posts even entered between them, some time back that I tried to point out, and I was accused of Harassment by the violator.
There were 3 of these in a two day period, with no other posts even entered between them, some time back that I tried to point out, and I was accused of Harassment by the violator.
A tactic often employed by those who break the rules (playing victim). Just report the infraction to the mods and move on.
That wouldn't be hot linking, it would however, fall under spamming. Why?
CO and TDU2 are both off topic for the Star Trek Online Forums. Now, if it did happen that you found a way to post something on topic from the forums for games about racing and super heroes, it would likely fall under Cross Posting.
IF there's something happening on another Atari title that we think needs to be discussed here, we'll make sure to post a thread about it ourselves (as we did with the Champions Online: Free for All announcement).
Thanks,
Stormshade
What about elements of the Atari hierarchy that fall under more than one game? Such as Atari Tokens or the C-Store?
Are we no longer permitted, for example, to link to discussions or dev comments about the Champions C-Store, as a way of advocating suggestions and changes to the STO C-Store?
Another question: will the signature editor be modified to disallow five line sigs? Right now, it disallows TEN line sigs:
Your signature contains too many lines and must be shortened. You may only have up to 10 line(s).
If people push the sigs to the editor's limit, they're 5 lines over. That's not good for newcomers who don't know to count their sig lines or other people who assume the sig editor will count their lines for them.
... beside I been using it for many months and I wouldn't even remember which file it was and with the site down I cannot download to check the file and take it out....
If you really wanted to removing them is easy. All the enhancements from that site sit inside "Star Trek Online\Live\Localdata", deleting the contents of that folder will return the game to default.
Another question: will the signature editor be modified to disallow five line sigs? Right now, it disallows TEN line sigs:
If people push the sigs to the editor's limit, they're 5 lines over. That's not good for newcomers who don't know to count their sig lines or other people who assume the sig editor will count their lines for them.
Yes, I'll be making that change (As well as the others) on either Tuesday, or late Monday night.
To start, the community team is no longer answering PMs. So, please use the ticket system to reach us. We're doing this because PMs don't really allow us to keep records of what is being said in our responses to you. It's unfortunate, but also needed.
[snip]
Stormshade
Sorry .. I wish I had read this before sending you one earlier today regarding a clarification posting "hot links". I use my personal web site for up-loading picts. of models and other similar related materials. The site itself is not for review or a forum board ( I use it instead of other sites as it is more reliable). Does this create a problem ?
(never mind about the ship ... that's another thread)
Also: regarding signatures: should we leave out animations? Some times that can create problems as well.
I posted this earlier in the German forums when the question came up and Stormy asked me to share the list with you guys here once more, too.
We have very few changes from the old rules to the 'new' rules. The main points here:
It is now just one document. The old documents were in some cases conflicting and in others redundant.
You now have the point value of an assigned infraction stated with the infraction. This should help anyone understand what may happen when certain things are done. With one exception, these are still the old point values (see below).
Obscene, Vulgar, Improper language. We used to have three separate infractions for this at 1, 5 and 10 points respectively. This was merged into one single infraction at 5 points.
Spamming was separated from Flaming and Trolling. We decided that spamming should not be together with trolling and flaming. One of these things is not like the other...
Signature Images: STO Forums can now have signature images instead of text if they so choose.
Signature/Avatar infraction: THIS is a new one. We had some problems on one of our boards regarding users following our requests, so we put it up as a rule and spelled it out.
Posting of private communication: With naming and shaming; posting of PM conversation and whispers happening even if we ask to not have people do it, we decided it deserved new wording to make it more visible.
Hate Speech: This used to be Protected Classes. The wording seemed to have folks confused so we re-wrote to make matters more clear.
There we have it. 8 points that have really changed. We even copy/pasted most of the old rules into the new ones, so that no change at all happened.
I really do not see a reason for anyone to worry. Indeed, the new document should make matters easier.
Real-Life Personal Information 20 points
You are not allowed to post personal, real-life information such as home addresses, home phone numbers, or other personal information belonging to any person, including, without limitation, yourself.
Are you aware that your forum software includes a profile section where users are encouraged to enter their birth date, IM contact info, location, interests, occupation and biography? How can you have an option in your forum software that actively encourages behaviour that gets people perma-banned?
It seems to me that this entire issue could be resolved quite easily, by the Devs activating the "Automatically close threads with no posts for ___days" option available in almost all forum software.
Indeed. Why are you not simply auto-locking threads after 30 days?
Because we hope that you guys, just like us, exercise some common sense. For example: I "bumped" a bug posting only last week which was about a week over 30 days. It still was relevant. It helped us trace something.
Up until now, we have always HAD the rule, just not with a time frame stuck to it. It may happen in the future, too, that a thread has relevance after 30 days and we may leave it open. It may also be that the thread is simply being bumped up with a "me, too" type posting that holds no relevance to the discussion.
Also: Most of the necro posts I closed in the last couple of weeks were MONTHS old. As in: A reply was posted in March 2011 when the last posting in the thread was November 2010. We simply set the deadline of 30 days so that if a topic really did not further anything; we can close it. Further: We had a LOT of people complain previously that we never gave a precise time. We did give one now, as was previously requested.
So the question as to why we're not automatically close thread using a script now pretty much is: Right now we do not want to do it that way.
I don't know about that. I've seen already at least two threads closed because they were "out of date" that were still relevant (specifically the melee guide: http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=97085&page=13 which had a post on March 2nd followed by a post on April 3rd, then a GM closing - 31 days, which is one day over, sure, but it still had good info about melee weapons/combos; and a thread about Perpetual's ship designs, many of which are still not in game, which makes that thread still current). I can understand closing threads with 2 months between postings, regardless of content, but that melee guide was still good, and closing it just because it was one day over the limit does not boost my faith that these threads will be looked at on a case-by-case basis.
Yes, there will be exceptions. When we; that is Cryptic; find that a thread holds outdated info, is bumped for the heck of it without having anything really relevant in it etc... we will close after 30 days. After 31. After 32.
Or we may not, if the thread actually furthers things. Dead horses however get smelly and we rather not have those about.
However, after over 30 days, we assume that the community as a whole has said what they needed to say and have moved on.
Comments
yes, thats not a problem.
Is that a problem just on the side of using them? not sure if policy changed on that subject as before it was not supported and if you game crashed you where to blame. If it is no longer allowed I am going to have a hard time finding them all.
and I will disagree in that. While I appreciate and understand what you are saying, many on the forums were posting with very little regard or manners, or in a respectful approach to each other. You simply see wishstone a touch more because she is doing her job, I see alot more posts by the other GM's who simply moderate and do not write anything except to the individual they moderate based on the same rules that have existed.
Even me myself have let my temper get the best of me sometimes, yet some are just flagrant in how they respond to others.
I for one want to applaud Wishstone, Storm, and the other mods for getting a handle on the forums. That is all I see, people doing their jobs, based on the agreements we all accepted to post in their private forums.
Thank you.
You find out that by doing something in the game that cannot possibly have been an intended game design, you are able to do something else that normally is not possible.
Say: Suddenly you realize that if you feed your tribble 50 cups of hot chocolate in 30 seconds; your tribble breaks and can be equipped in any slot. This way you can even equip it as armor and suddenly you have a very fluffy pullover. This tribble armor also makes you invulnerable.
That sounds like it should not happen, right?
So, we'd ask you to NOT post it on the forums. This has a few reasons, for example: Folks can get in trouble. Someone will be curious and use this in PvP "just to try it out" or "just to test it". And when a GM comes and bans them, their defense will be "But that is unfair, people were talking about it on the forums, I thought it was okay!!"
Not just that, but due to this posting, a LOT of people suddenly know about it and now everyone is doing it. And perhaps fixing the problem isn't done easily, so now, for weeks, we either remove tribbles from the game or people run around exploiting. All because someone posted about it.
What to do instead?
Write a bug report. If this is what you feel could even break the game, make extra sure and send a community ticket with the ticket number of your bug report and ask us to please have QA look at this as soon as possible.
I'll always try to give you the answer you can quote me with in any regard and go with safely. When I say something, I try to base it on our EULA, TOS or what I hear directly from Devs and CS. This is what you can find in the EULA: Due to this wording I would always suggest to players to not change anything in the game files; add something to the game files that did not come through a patcher from us directly or similar. The reason I say it like this is roughly 7 years of working the CS side of a number of MMOs. Some allowed such modifications and always make clear in the EULA what they allow and when.
Since our wording is the way it is my quotable comment on changing anything in the game is: Since it is against the EULA, it is fully at your own risk. You may get in trouble for it, so I cannot tell you that you may do so. (Because I kinda like you guys and would prefer if you stick around, see?
Totally!
1) I started a thread where I review Foundry missions and then post the review on the forums. I only review a mission on the request of the author, and I've specifically stated in my OP that my reviews will be very critical.
So if I criticize someone's mission - NOT THE PERSON, THE MISSION - am I in danger of violating the forum rules?
2) Can we please finally get an official ruling on whether these words are considered insults by the moderation staff: noob, carebear, feddybear, fedbear?
3) Does the "Hate Speech" section also apply to people who post derogatory stuff about Americans? I've seen a lot of "Americans are dumb/fat/lazy/uneducated" on the forums and I'd like an official statement on whether this is allowed or not.
4) Is it really going to be against the rules to write a single word, or short phrase, of Klingon on the official forums of Star Trek Online? How about in the Klingon subforum?
So.....all it takes is a good beating ?!?!?!
Now...to figure out the bribery rate of the other CMs to deliver the beatings, and we are set.
Kidding - thanks Storm and Wish
I can't imagine that being against the rules. I mean I wouldn't take offense to anyone being critical of my mission. Kinda the point of critics, actually. Anyone who got upset over it is being way to sensitive.
You are Kidding!! Seriously!? Why the heck is that against the rules??! I couldn't say Qapla' to awesome thread? Or g'day't, or Khest'n, or nuqDaq ta' SoH pol yuch?
Here are some items I just read in the Rules that I have questions about.
"1. Creation of First! posts.
.........
2. Creating Duplicate Threads
(I have Numbered them for ease of Transition here.)
1. Creation of First Posts?? What is that saying, that a Post can not be put in place unless that subject is already active?? What does the word First as used here Mean?
2. Creation of Duplicate Threads. Does this basically mean that people should do a Really Thorough Search before starting a thread, or maybe face disciplinary process for duplicating some one else's previous post? or just their own? (I have seen this one done by a couple of people across Forum Sections, and in a single section.)
Invunerable tribble jumpers should SO happen ^_^
yeah ok maybe not, but as examples go, thats as awesome as playable horta captains
being the recipient of Peregrine Falcon's first official one-star review i would be upset if the forum rules came down hard on the idea. having an honest and critical review given is actually very helpful if one's ego allows it and in my case has prompted me to work harder at improving my own work.
while personal attacks do need to be covered, i dont think critical review, even if harsh, should be covered unless it goes into personal attacks.
Shouldn't you get an infraction for that? :P
Would you be surprised if I told you that the majority of the people posting such comments are actually American?
1) The "first" post is referring to the creation of reply to an OP, whereby it is the first reply and usually only contains that word (i.e. First). It is to denote a competive attempt of a post with no real content.
2) Only an assumption here, so take it as you see fit. These are duplicate threads from the same original poster, usually in different sections of the forum to attempt a shotgun way of either obtaining an answer or to relay information, usually negative. If it was just the duplication of similar threads, then this rule might also conflict with the 30 day old thread revival rule.
Beside this, I wish there was a way for infractions to go away, I mean surely after a year one can be cleaned of them.
So, initially like Bumping, with no extra content being added? Done by players wanting to get the total Post Count up??
There were 3 of these in a two day period, with no other posts even entered between them, some time back that I tried to point out, and I was accused of Harassment by the violator.
A tactic often employed by those who break the rules (playing victim). Just report the infraction to the mods and move on.
What about elements of the Atari hierarchy that fall under more than one game? Such as Atari Tokens or the C-Store?
Are we no longer permitted, for example, to link to discussions or dev comments about the Champions C-Store, as a way of advocating suggestions and changes to the STO C-Store?
If people push the sigs to the editor's limit, they're 5 lines over. That's not good for newcomers who don't know to count their sig lines or other people who assume the sig editor will count their lines for them.
Personally, I'm hoping for a tribble-pelt to be added to the Klingon lifetime members armor.
Yes, I'll be making that change (As well as the others) on either Tuesday, or late Monday night.
Thanks,
Stormshade
So you could have a link to your Fleet site or something too?
Sorry .. I wish I had read this before sending you one earlier today regarding a clarification posting "hot links". I use my personal web site for up-loading picts. of models and other similar related materials. The site itself is not for review or a forum board ( I use it instead of other sites as it is more reliable). Does this create a problem ?
(never mind about the ship ... that's another thread)
Also: regarding signatures: should we leave out animations? Some times that can create problems as well.
Thanks
We have very few changes from the old rules to the 'new' rules. The main points here:
- It is now just one document. The old documents were in some cases conflicting and in others redundant.
- You now have the point value of an assigned infraction stated with the infraction. This should help anyone understand what may happen when certain things are done. With one exception, these are still the old point values (see below).
- Obscene, Vulgar, Improper language. We used to have three separate infractions for this at 1, 5 and 10 points respectively. This was merged into one single infraction at 5 points.
- Spamming was separated from Flaming and Trolling. We decided that spamming should not be together with trolling and flaming. One of these things is not like the other...
- Signature Images: STO Forums can now have signature images instead of text if they so choose.
- Signature/Avatar infraction: THIS is a new one. We had some problems on one of our boards regarding users following our requests, so we put it up as a rule and spelled it out.
- Posting of private communication: With naming and shaming; posting of PM conversation and whispers happening even if we ask to not have people do it, we decided it deserved new wording to make it more visible.
- Hate Speech: This used to be Protected Classes. The wording seemed to have folks confused so we re-wrote to make matters more clear.
There we have it. 8 points that have really changed. We even copy/pasted most of the old rules into the new ones, so that no change at all happened.I really do not see a reason for anyone to worry. Indeed, the new document should make matters easier.
Coolio. How many lines do quotes count as?
And do these other changes include automating the old thread closings?
Are you aware that your forum software includes a profile section where users are encouraged to enter their birth date, IM contact info, location, interests, occupation and biography? How can you have an option in your forum software that actively encourages behaviour that gets people perma-banned?
Indeed. Why are you not simply auto-locking threads after 30 days?
Up until now, we have always HAD the rule, just not with a time frame stuck to it. It may happen in the future, too, that a thread has relevance after 30 days and we may leave it open. It may also be that the thread is simply being bumped up with a "me, too" type posting that holds no relevance to the discussion.
Also: Most of the necro posts I closed in the last couple of weeks were MONTHS old. As in: A reply was posted in March 2011 when the last posting in the thread was November 2010. We simply set the deadline of 30 days so that if a topic really did not further anything; we can close it. Further: We had a LOT of people complain previously that we never gave a precise time. We did give one now, as was previously requested.
So the question as to why we're not automatically close thread using a script now pretty much is: Right now we do not want to do it that way.
Or we may not, if the thread actually furthers things. Dead horses however get smelly and we rather not have those about.
However, after over 30 days, we assume that the community as a whole has said what they needed to say and have moved on.