A Request To The Mods: Lock Old Threads

[Soviet Heavy]

Nobody likes to deal with necro'd threads. If a thread is less than a month old, a necro is okay, but when someone digs up a thread that is two years old it becomes annoying.

I have a suggestion. On another Forum I frequent, threads that remain inactive after a certain amount of time become locked. To necro the thread, they need to get permission from a moderator to do so. Would this work on The Escapist? I feel it would be a good way to cut down on the random revivals of 2010 threads. Keeping the necro-ing to perhaps a three week period helps keep the conversation relevant.

Does anyone like this idea? Any way it could be made better?

 

[Suicidejim]

Ironically, I'm of the reverse opinion. A one-month old thread always feels too recent to be revived for me, whereas, for a two year old thread or something similarly ancient, I generally feel enough time has passed for the topic to become relevant again.

Although, that said, I suppose I'd rather just make a new thread on the same topic at that point.

 

[Vault101]

I've recently had an old thread Necro on me....

I mean how did they even FIND that thing? though its become relevant now what with ME3's ending and all..somewhat

 

[tippy2k2]

It certainly wouldn't hurt to ask.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Moderation-Team

Throw it in there and see what they think. Beware though, if they deem you unworthy, you get an instant ban that's SO hard that your computer explodes or so the legend says, no one has survived to confirm it...

 

[Luftwaffles]

Maybe its because they actually use the search bar. Theres a line i suppose.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Maybe its because they actually use the search bar. Theres a line i suppose.

There's a difference between using the searchbar to find a recent thread instead of making a new one and grabbing a two year old thread from the bottom of the barrel. Oftentimes, the necromancer just throws his opinion in and runs off without looking for discussion.

 

[DustyDrB]

If you report the necromancer, the thread will usually be locked. I do that. Not because I think the person should be warned, but because the thread should be shut down. Though one month is a bit short.

 

[Lucem712]

I don't mind necro'd threads, as long as they aren't something useless and still have discussion value. I love how if you over use a thread topic, some will tell you to use the search bar and if you necro a thread because you wanted to discuss it; they will complain about that.

I do like the idea of changing the title colour of threads older than a year or whatever, just so you know 'hey, this thread was started in 2010'

 

[BathorysGraveland]

It is annoying. I commented on a necro'd thread very recently and only after I posted did I realise it was from 2009. Silly, silly me. But your idea is very beneficial.

 

[Vault101]

huh? is it me or did a few necro threads just pop up?

 

[lacktheknack]

But I LIKE necro'd threads! It's like a screenshot of the past!

I'd like for them to remain unlocked, as a well-timed necro can bring new perspectives to a current issue/be absolutely hilarious. They're not commonplace enough to be truly annoying.

 

[viranimus]

It likely occurs because the escapist is tied into several search engines that can yield results on specified topics. These results do not show up so much via google, but the other base engines like bing and most dominantly yahoo.


For a random example go to www.dogpile.com and look up any username from this thread, lets randomly choose Lucem712 because its not a name that is automatically attached to any other subject. punch that into dogpile and you get the first page predominantly reflecting specific posts from Lucem712 on the escapist. (if you do this on google, you get predominantly the various different websites Lucem uses like youtube or steam, etc.) The same is true of my name as my name is a name more unique in construction. If you look on dogpile you get a list of mostly my posts, if you look on google you get a list of mostly what I have on other sites, though some are not tied to me, most of them are

So now, imagine if someone punches in to a random search engine any given topic like Ill use one I know exists such as Screwads if you punch that phrase into dogpile youve got a high prob to find a post I started a while back as one of the first choices. Oddly if its a specific topic the escapists forum posts end up ranking pretty high on Yahoo and bing, google, not so much.

So in many cases its a person who was searching for a topic, and an old buried topic of ours ended up in our search results, this user who came by us randomly or doesnt use us very often decides not being very familiar with the not a good idea to necro rule ends up necroing. Hell as I recall I ended up starting to post here for that very same reason, so I would imagine others did too which also explains the "low post count" on necros usually.

Well thats just my thoughts on why it happens. Sorry if Im playing captain obvious, or maybe its captain oblivious. Dont know if this is common knowledge, or not. Just seems like its more obscure.

As for personal opinion, it really depends. Ive enjoyed posting in a necro'd thread before, however I know it can be highly annoying to get quoted a year later from a necro'd thread, though getting quoted to be proven wrong is annoying no matter what. Just seems worse when it had to come out of the way back machine to get here.

 

[Lionsfan]

Isn't it a double-edged sword? On the one hand, we don't want threads to be necro'd. On the other hand, we yell at people to use the search bar if something has been posted, and not to post it twice.

I guess it's really, how long is too long for a thread to be revived?

 

[Astoria]

Isn't it a double-edged sword? On the one hand, we don't want threads to be necro'd. On the other hand, we yell at people to use the search bar if something has been posted, and not to post it twice.

I guess it's really, how long is too long for a thread to be revived?

Yeah that's the problem here. I suppose if you don't really feel the topic needs a new discussion then you could just not post. I think for most things you could say 6 months is long enough for the topic to be brought up again unless it was a thread that had an awful lot of replies.

 

[Lionsfan]

Isn't it a double-edged sword? On the one hand, we don't want threads to be necro'd. On the other hand, we yell at people to use the search bar if something has been posted, and not to post it twice.

I guess it's really, how long is too long for a thread to be revived?

Yeah that's the problem here. I suppose if you don't really feel the topic needs a new discussion then you could just not post. I think for most things you could say 6 months is long enough for the topic to be brought up again unless it was a thread that had an awful lot of replies.

If it's something that slipped under the radar then I think should by all means go ahead, or maybe if it was a 2 page thread where everyone agreed on it, and you have a new spin on things.

But it's really annoying when someone [footnote]mostly new users, or people who don't post often[/footnote] goes through the search bar to find stuff to comment on, and then necro's a 9 page thread about "Why Nerds don't like The Big Bang Theory" from last August only to say [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.304640-Why-do-some-nerds-hate-Big-Bang-Theory?page=9#14146681], After watching dozens of episodes, I don't think I've ever seen the show tell a joke. Just making references to nerdy things does not make a joke

 

[Realitycrash]

I, on the other hand, plan to Necro this thread in a year. -Smile-

 

[Spitfire]

Right, because an old thread can't possibly be relevant in present time.

On most forums where I've seen this done, I've found it to be a terrible idea. You'd have situations where a user would want to reply to an old post, only to find that the thread got locked, prompting the user to make a whole new thread, just to address that reply.
Eventually, this ends up clogging the forums even more, and makes searching for a specific topic a living hell. Besides, The Escapist has a bad enough search engine as it is.

In short, I disagree with you, and I think that such a rule is unnecessary and counterproductive.

 

[requisitename]

I think that before anything can be done about necroing the higher ups need to define the term. As long as everyone has their own ideas of how long a thread needs to have no new posts before it's considered necroed if posted in, there is always going to be confusion and it'll be easy for new members to screw it up.

I've no idea what constitutes a thread necro, so I basically avoid posting in anything past the second page. :-/

Also, +1 to the "people yell about other people not using the search bar" thing. The rules are very unclear about when you should post in an old thread and when you should start a new one. It's something that's confused me as long as I've been here (which is longer than my join date implies). While I err on the side of caution (don't post in anything more than a couple of days old, have only started one top level post on something I knew couldn't possibly be a repost), I think a lot of people don't.

 

[Esotera]

It needs to be done automatically, if no-one posts for a certain period of time, or at least have a big message saying "This thread is old, let it die in peace", which is what Daniweb does.

Anything discussed in a necromanced thread could be discussed better by creating a new one, as current affairs have probably changed, new games will have come out, or people's opinions might just have changed.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Yes I agree, the script to automate such things wouldn't take more then a few minutes.
It would save a lot of trouble when someone bumps a thread and just take others along unknowingly because checking the OP date is the last thing on your mind.