Do You Think Old Threads Should Be Locked?

[joeylittle]

I am thinking along the lines of something around the 3 year mark, being the last post date upon the thread. If nobody has responded to something in 3 years... chances are they aren't going to now.

Good point. That would allow fairly active topics to remain active, even through silences, and still put the ones that have gone totally quiet to bed.

 

[scout86]

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I think @Solara makes a good point about responding to someone who's no longer on the site. There's always the possibility for someone to revive a topic with "I was reading an old thread and......"

What ever works!

 

[RussH]

I think I am in the locking it camp. You are right we can still read it, and if there is something in the thread that warrents resurrecting it, then a new thread can be initated.

 

[Friday]

If we could quote from old posts, so the impulse to ignore them as they're unresponsive is nixed, and one can ref. old knowledge. I'd jump off the fence entirely. Don't know if that would be a coding nightmare or not.

& Yep. 3 years sounds solid.

 

[Sammyiam]

I think lock them, sorry I didn't realise that you could still read them. The other point is that they are probably quite outdated by the three years mark as well, with all the new information coming out people could even get them selves information that will do more harm than good.

 

[anthony]

If we could quote from old posts

Locking a thread doesn't stop anything except new responses. You can still use the multi-quote system within them to quote anything in that content.

people could even get them selves information that will do more harm than good

That is exactly one of the issues. When EMDR was first being used to treat complex trauma, it had devastating results which led to many people being far worse retraumatised than treated. Those discussions are outdated now, as EMDR has evolved to treat complex trauma very effectively today. That is just one example. PTSD is a pretty stagnant thing, though opinions certainly change, and some facets have also changed / evolved.

PTSD used to be a chemical imbalance, then when they could read neuronal activity more readily in the brain, they found there was no such thing, let alone it causing PTSD. All those old discussions were good information then, bad information now.

 

[Seasounds]

this doesn't stop threads being found in Google, nor does it stop anyone reading them, it only stops people responding to them. You can always create a thread a link to an existingthread / post.

@anthony, thank you for clarifying.

I value the old posts and want access to them. From what you and others mentioned, and after thinking about it, responding to posts over a six to 12 month time, seems obsolete. Your time frame is generous.

I vote for being able to search for and keeping the old posts available, and locking/limiting the response time. Thanks for letting my opinion, and other opinions, count!

 

[ghotiff]

I vote for locking at 2-3years.

 

[anthony]

Thanks for letting my opinion, and other opinions, count!

It is normally members who decide these things... always has been, always will. The majority of aspects instigated here are based on member feedback and member acceptance / rejection.

 

[Tanishq]

My opinion is no. Some old threads have helped me and are helping me, including yours Anthony. :D (Sometimes I think this forum is treasure, the more you dig, the more insights you find ;))

 

[anthony]

Some old threads have helped me and are helping me

How does locking those affect you being helped? They don't go anywhere, they just can't be directly responded to any more.

 

[Tanishq]

How does locking those affect you being helped?

It still will help me. :)

Well, Now I get it what is the question about. At least people won't keep bumping it if the thread is outdated, topics which were created way long ago.

Yes for locking them.