Not closed soon enough


PDA






Pat-inCO
September 5, 2008, 07:54 PM
Contrary to the way many are complaining, I think there are far too many threads that linger for too long.

Specific example, the thread on the Mountain Lion being shot outside of New Castle CO. The thread is so old that the link provided by the OP is no longer valid, and per the news(?) station that had it posted, they are removed after two to three weeks.

Unless there is a steady string of posts, I think a given thread should be closed after three weeks, PERIOD.

I would also like to see something put in place that just because a given "news" story involves a gun, it doesn't necessarily fit in a discussion forum.

I guess I'm just cranky, but a full half of the threads are just plain out Borrr-rrring. That's why I don't read beyond the initial post nor reply to them.

If you enjoyed reading about "Not closed soon enough" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JImbothefiveth
September 5, 2008, 08:01 PM
I don't know, if we leave them open, instead of having to post a new thread, you can just search and bring one back if you really must hear more about it.

Eric F
September 5, 2008, 08:06 PM
I would also like to see something put in place that just because a given "news" story involves a gun, it doesn't necessarily fit in a discussion forum.
I think Justin said some thing to this effect when the guy in Canada got his head choped off on a bus thread..........I couldnt agree more.

MMCSRET
September 6, 2008, 11:32 AM
I, too, would like to see the end of resurrection for threads that are old. I don't define old but I am of the opinion that with instant communication capabilities of today, maybe a year would be the limit. Don't discard them but lock them as they do serve a purpose as research items. Sort of like going to the library.

JDoe
September 6, 2008, 12:14 PM
I guess I'm just cranky, but a full half of the threads are just plain out Borrr-rrring. That's why I don't read beyond the initial post nor reply to them.

I could be wrong but if people are replying to threads you find "Borrr-rrring" they probably don't share your sentiments. :D

JDoe
September 6, 2008, 12:16 PM
I, too, would like to see the end of resurrection for threads that are old. I don't define old but I am of the opinion that with instant communication capabilities of today, maybe a year would be the limit. Don't discard them but lock them as they do serve a purpose as research items. Sort of like going to the library.

Should THR also restrict new threads to topics that have not been discussed before? :)

JShirley
September 6, 2008, 01:13 PM
No.

Less is more, when it comes to rulemaking.

You can never satisfy everyone all of the time. Staff is either too harsh/strict/rightwing or too lax/liberal/socialist/godless/pagan. Or something. Sometimes at the same time. :rolleyes:

I agree there's too much noise at times on the board. If you see an obvious example, hit the "notify administrator" button or PM any staff currently on the board (you'll see their names at the bottom of the forum index page).

Owen
September 6, 2008, 02:24 PM
Leave the old threads open. every now and then, someone comes along and adds something useful.

If I'm looking for info on .22 Hornet (speaking a recent thread, risen from the dead) its much easier to read through one thread than several dozen threads.

edited to add: It's not like talking about high-tech stuff, where 6 months later, the product is discontinued and completely obsolete. Heck, for a lot of firearms stuff, the basic knowledge from 30-40 years ago is still state of the art.

MMCSRET
September 6, 2008, 11:29 PM
I would much rather see a new repeat thread than an old one that comes up out of the dust of history. That is why they should be archived and if the question is still not answered then a new thread can be started.

Mal H
September 7, 2008, 02:36 AM
There is good reasoning on both sides of the argument.

Leaving them open allows for additional new data to be added to an old thread.

It also allows for a new member to post an inane "+1" to a 4 year old thread.

Closing them after a sufficient period of time has past prevents the latter and any other form of unnecessary thread resurrection from happening.

Any new data regarding an old topic could easily be put in a new thread with a link to the old, closed thread at or near the top of the first post.

However, we aren't going to be closing them if only because it would be a herculean task to do so. There is no tool or function readily available to us to go back and close the 300,000+ threads that would fit in the 'old' category. No moderator or administrator is going to take the time it would require to close them manually.

Up to this point, the problem has only been a minor nuisance with the occasional thread resurrection. Unless it becomes a major problem, we'll let it go for now. If and when it does, I guess we can hack the code and zap the database closing all the old threads.

If you enjoyed reading about "Not closed soon enough" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!