OT : To the Moderators

[Duck Dodgers]

I think that the moderators would have ( if they find the time , of course ) close all the threads which have their last reply more than a month old .

In the recent past , some members ( expecially the younger ones ) replied to thread more than ONE YEAR old ! This sure confuses and annoys us members !
I remember I found a thread about the Ducktales movie which was something like two years old .

Just a little idea that I think would be a good one...Thanks for the time , moderators .

[cbrubaker]

I think that the moderators would have ( if they find the time , of course ) close all the threads which have their last reply more than a month old .

In the recent past , some members ( expecially the younger ones ) replied to thread more than ONE YEAR old ! This sure confuses and annoys us members !
I remember I found a thread about the Ducktales movie which was something like two years old .

Just a little idea that I think would be a good one...Thanks for the time , moderators .
Depends on the post, of course. That Irv Spector thread was already couple months old when it was replied, and it brought an interesting thread about Spector's works, especially from his son.

[Javeman]

I think that the moderators would have ( if they find the time , of course ) close all the threads which have their last reply more than a month old .

In the recent past , some members ( expecially the younger ones ) replied to thread more than ONE YEAR old ! This sure confuses and annoys us members !

Just a little idea that I think would be a good one...Thanks for the time , moderators .Mmm...

The are 3,200+ threads in this board.

It takes at least three clicks of a mouse to lock up a thread.

That alone lasts around 20 seconds.

It takes about 10 seconds to get to the next thread.

Average time per locking a thread: 30 seconds.

Multiplied by 3,200... 26 hours 40 minutes.

And that's not counting the time the mods will need to take a break.

So no, it's not worth it because it's far too much work. I think the system works just fine as it is, if someone revives a thread with no current relevance, lock the thread and tell the user not to do it again. Reviving an old thread is not a severe offense, it's not worth going into that much work to prevent people for breaking a rule.

I remember I found a thread about the Ducktales movie which was something like two years old.That's impossible and you know it.

[J. B. Warner]

Maybe, instead of closing really old threads, the moderators could create a new archival section of the forum where they can put threads older than, say, six months (posting wouldn't be allowed, of course). That's what they do over at the No Homers Club and it seems to work fine.

[Thad]

Like Javeman said, it's not a serious offense, and that would be WAY too much work. The system works fine the way it is. Sometimes if stuff is revived where there's actual NEW material (like the Irv Spector thread as Charles said), it's not that big a deal.

-Thad

[Duck Dodgers]

That's impossible and you know it.


That's POSSIBLE and I know it !

When I say it's something like two years old , I mean that it was more than one year old , like one year and two or three months !

Probably I would have been more accurate . Do forgive me for this .

I know it cannot be 2 years old because GAC still have not two years . In fact , I did not say that the post was 2 years old but " something like 2 years old " .


I agree with you when you say that the system works fine the way it is . Mine was only an idea , in case some moderators would have liked to do it .
But anything works well anyway .

[Dan Porceddu]

So no, it's not worth it because it's far too much work. I think the system works just fine as it is, if someone revives a thread with no current relevance, lock the thread and tell the user not to do it again. Reviving an old thread is not a severe offense, it's not worth going into that much work to prevent people for breaking a rule.

Thanks, Javeman. I agree with you on this completely. I think this is really an issue that regulates itself, and in some cases old threads when bumped can still produce interesting, meaningful discussion. Only some threads- those that are particularly relevant to the time they were posted- cause this problem for users, and it's not a pressing enough issue that the moderators should go back to every thread on the forum over a couple months old and lock them.

Besides, setting a strict deadline like "in two months, this thread gets locked" doesn't really strike me as efficient or good moderating practice.

[Duck Dodgers]

Ok , sorry for the loss of time ( gee, I think this thread will be closed even before a month :p )