Can we disable necroposting on this forum?

[udi]

I'm hoping one of the administrators see this. Is there a way to timeout old posts to prevent necroposting on this forum? I've noticed a lot of people getting tripped up on old threads and reviving dead posts clouds the newest discussions. I get how people might not want to close some threads, but it would be much better if people created new threads which linked to old posts.

[Merlin]

I'm hoping one of the administrators see this. Is there a way to timeout old posts to prevent necroposting on this forum? I've noticed a lot of people getting tripped up on old threads and reviving dead posts clouds the newest discussions. I get how people might not want to close some threads, but it would be much better if people created new threads which linked to old posts.

That is a slippery slope that I don't think we want to traverse.

I don't know if there is a way to automatically lock posts after a set time, but even if there is, how long does it need to be before a thread should be locked against new posts? Is that lock time based on when the post was created or last responded to?

Either way, resurrecting necro threads is just a part of being part of a forum with a long history, we try to discourage it but I don't think it really derails people too much.

[jsd]

I do think it happens a little too much, but there are definitely times when it's been helpful and relevant to dig up an older thread. I think suffering through the "misuse" is worth the hassle in the long run.

[burbuja0512]

This forum might be different from other forums "out there" in the sense that people who have REALLY good information graduate and don't return. They left behind a ton of great info about very specific questions. And even if the original poster isn't around, some of us hang out and might be able to answer the questions. So I don't personally mind an old post getting revived for that reason.

[davewill]

I actually think it would be a good idea to lock a thread after maybe a year of inactivity. That would allow for people to have progress threads that live a long time, but keep down the true zombies.

[udi]

With all that has changed in the past few / several months (TESU cornerstone, TESU's rejection of Shmoop credits, addition of the new Study.com courses, etc), a lot of (or most?) information that was really good -- no longer is.

It's easy to get tripped up on the date if someone necroposts and others follow, especially new people that aren't considering the possibility of old threads. I don't think any posts should be deleted, but a lot of us have probably gotten tripped up a few times when old posts get revived. And then people reply to your necropost to let you know that you're necroposting and the dead thread animates again!

I don't know if there's an option to retire specific threads as opposed to blanket retiring all posts of a certain age. I think it's more important in a forum like this because a one-course mistake could cost someone a lot of time and or money if they're trying to complete things within deadlines, to avoid recurring fees, etc.

It's not a major issue, so if most people want to keep open old threads, then it might make sense to just keep it the way it is.

[dfrecore]

With all that has changed in the past few / several months (TESU cornerstone, TESU's rejection of Shmoop credits, addition of the new Study.com courses, etc), a lot of (or most?) information that was really good -- no longer is.

It's easy to get tripped up on the date if someone necroposts and others follow, especially new people that aren't considering the possibility of old threads. I don't think any posts should be deleted, but a lot of us have probably gotten tripped up a few times when old posts get revived. And then people reply to your necropost to let you know that you're necroposting and the dead thread animates again!

I don't know if there's an option to retire specific threads as opposed to blanket retiring all posts of a certain age. I think it's more important in a forum like this because a one-course mistake could cost someone a lot of time and or money if they're trying to complete things within deadlines, to avoid recurring fees, etc.

It's not a major issue, so if most people want to keep open old threads, then it might make sense to just keep it the way it is.

I'm guessing people were talking about closing old threads so as not to allow new posts to them, not deleting them or making them unaccessible.

There are ALWAYS changes to things, it's pretty constant.  So that's not really a great reason to make a change.

But, I also think that locking down posts older than maybe 3-5 years would be ideal.  If people want to ask questions, they can always create a new post.  But having them ask questions on 5, 8, 10yo posts is kind of nuts.

[sanantone]

I agree with dfrecore that things are always changing. A thread from yesterday could be inaccurate. I put together a criminal justice plan for someone a few months ago, and I just found out today that CSU Global got rid of many of their CJ SSAs.

When someone posts in an old thread, that means that he or she found the old thread. The person was searching for an answer to a question and came across that thread. In those cases, I think it's good when someone responds to a post in an old thread with updated information so the next person won't be confused when he or she comes across the same thread. If we lock threads, people are still going to read them.

[udi]

I agree with dfrecore that things are always changing. A thread from yesterday could be inaccurate. I put together a criminal justice plan for someone a few months ago, and I just found out today that CSU Global got rid of many of their CJ SSAs.

When someone posts in an old thread, that means that he or she found the old thread. The person was searching for an answer to a question and came across that thread. In those cases, I think it's good when someone responds to a post in an old thread with updated information so the next person won't be confused when he or she comes across the same thread. If we lock threads, people are still going to read them.

You could create a new thread and just link to the old post. The problem is that even more people are going to read the old thread as soon as it gets a reply.

[cookderosa]

I'm hoping one of the administrators see this. Is there a way to timeout old posts to prevent necroposting on this forum? I've noticed a lot of people getting tripped up on old threads and reviving dead posts clouds the newest discussions. I get how people might not want to close some threads, but it would be much better if people created new threads which linked to old posts.

a lot of people get tripped up on old threads? How many is a lot? These feels like a big reaction to a minor annoyance. I just looked it up, and this community makes 58.29 per day. We get a really old revived post how often? Once a day? Once a week? Once a month? I'm missing why this is a big deal.