Should bumping a post only to lock it afterward be permitted?

[alani123]

The fact that there's no limit on how often a post can be locked by its OP allows for users to bump their own threads continuously without any interruption.

I've noticed several instances in which this is abused, but just to showcase how I think that thread locking at its current state can be abused: Here's an example where OP keeps posting in his own thread advertising a service of very dubious reputation without allowing any discussion.

[SaltySpitoon]

The fact that there's no limit on how often a post can be locked by its OP allows for users to bump their own threads continuously without any interruption.

I've noticed several instances in which this is abused, but just to showcase how I think that thread locking at its current state can be abused: Here's an example where OP keeps posting in his own thread advertising a service of very dubious reputation without allowing any discussion.

I don't see why not, as long as they are only bumping once per day. Thats not much different than self moderated threads the way I see it. If you have something you need to say regarding a topic, but the OP isn't allowing you to do so either because they keep locking their topic or their thread is self moderated, make your own thread with regards to it.

[Lutpin]

There is a rule about deleting old bumps that could (/should) be exercised here.

[SaltySpitoon]

There is a rule about deleting old bumps that could (/should) be exercised here.

While thats another topic, old bumps should be deleted if the post is solely for the purpose of bumping your thread. If one of your bumps is adding additional details to your thread, you don't necessarily need to delete it.

Unless I misunderstood, the topic of the OP is about bumps and locking a thread in order to keep other people from posting in it in regards to censoring info, keeping people from making scam accusations, etc. If I'm misunderstanding, if you could clarify I'll take another crack at it. If I'm not, see my first post.

[alani123]

Why not use the forum's self moderation feature if the goal is to prevent others from posting? The self moderation feature is dedicated for such a thing and even gives other users viewing the thread a warning whereas lock-posting can be used to deceive, especially provided that there's no public log or warning. Especially for past activity that could be completely fabricated in a thread with this technique.

[SaltySpitoon]

Why not use the forum's self moderation feature if the goal is to prevent others from posting? The self moderation feature is dedicated for such a thing and even gives other users viewing the thread a warning whereas lock-posting can be used to deceive, especially provided that there's no public log or warning. Especially for past activity that could be completely fabricated in a thread with this technique.

That would probably be ideal, though its their own choice I suppose. Some people don't know how to use the self moderation feature, I guess some people just don't want to bother moderating people's posts in the first place, so they decide to just lock their threads to keep replies out. If someone is doing something they shouldn't be doing, and you can't post directly in their thread, you just make a new thread yourself.

I don't really see how bump and locking one's own thread is any worse than self moderation. If someone's intentions are to deceive, they are going to do it one way or another, don't be fooled, leave them feedback on their trust page, or create a thread to let people know.

[Quickseller]

IMO, it should be clear that a locked thread for an "open" offer potentially is an indication of a scammer and additional caution should be taken. This however will not always be the case.

[botany]

Why not use the forum's self moderation feature if the goal is to prevent others from posting? The self moderation feature is dedicated for such a thing and even gives other users viewing the thread a warning whereas lock-posting can be used to deceive, especially provided that there's no public log or warning. Especially for past activity that could be completely fabricated in a thread with this technique.

I have seen threads where the objective is to ask prospective clients to PM the owner. In that case, it makes sense for the owner to lock the thread. He wouldn't want prospective clients to post in the thread and then get poached by competition.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

The rules are one bump per 24 hours as far as I'm aware. I don't see why the OP can't lock the thread after their 1 bump a day though, there doesn't seem anything wrong with doing that imo.

[FFrankie]

IMO, it should be clear that a locked thread for an "open" offer potentially is an indication of a scammer and additional caution should be taken. This however will not always be the case.

Thebutterzone is a great example of this, his selling threads are always locked but everything he is selling is clearly listed with all of the information needed in the OP. Locking his threads only to bump them prevents un-nessary signature campaign posters.