Question about forum threads expirey date

[5W-KILO]

When is the right time or date to stop replying to a thread? I see where some complained about replying to thread that has been opened for a few months.

Why are some members not locking or closing their threads after they get answers off them? Only very few practice this on this forum.

[1714767594]

1714767594

[1714767594]

1714767594

[1714767594]

1714767594

[1714767594]

1714767594

[1714767594]

1714767594

[cryptoaddictchie]

When is the right time or date to stop replying to a thread? I see where some complained about replying to thread that has been opened for a few months.

Why are some members not locking or closing their threads after they get answers off them? Only very few practice this on this forum.

If the OP has been answered already. If you will notice some topics are in a form of question and everybody response to it with different opinion, if the OP is fulfilled with the answers then he can close or locked the thread. Depends on the topic if that was has a specific need.

Thats the thing OP should always locked their thread if its already served its purpose. If he didnt probably some reported it so moderators can act on behalf. But doing or practicing it is a good responsibility for every users here.

[Pandorak]

When is the right time or date to stop replying to a thread?

When a topic about a question has got its absolute answer.

Why are some members not locking or closing their threads after they get answers off them? Only very few practice this on this forum.

Based on my observations, topics about questions are usually created by newbies, so it makes sense if they don't lock the topics they create, even though they already have answers to their questions. Like on this topic for example: invest in bitcoin or altcoin?

Raceonsucced already got enough responses which i think are enough to answer the question, he has also responded, but until now he has not locked the topic he made. Of course (although i'm not 100% sure), this has something to do with the newbies not knowing how to lock the topics they create or about the responsibility of being a topic maker. If you think the topics have got answers, you can report to the moderator to lock the topic to avoid spam responses.

[lovesmayfamilis]

A good question that could be followed by a good solution for you, OP, If you see that the question or topic has exhausted itself, you can ask the moderators to close the topic, as its future may turn into a mega spam stream. Some topics do create lively communication, but even there, deviations from the very essence of the topic are very common. Basically, the topic ceases to be relevant on pages 4–5, as all subsequent answers turn into chewing on earlier answers.
Feel free to make a report to the moderators. 

[Upgrade00]

When is the right time or date to stop replying to a thread?

• When you have nothing else to add to the existing discussion,
• And when the thread has been inactive for so long that it makes no sense to bump it up at that time as it offers no current benefit to users.

Why are some members not locking or closing their threads after they get answers off them? Only very few practice this on this forum.

They are either unaware of the lock option or the users just don't care enough to do it.
You can always report a thread you feel has run its course to the mods and they could consider locking it.

[Charles-Tim]

Why are some members not locking or closing their threads after they get answers off them? Only very few practice this on this forum.

If I ask a question and it has been answered, I decided not to lock the thread because some other users may still want to contribute, I like all experienced members on this forum to contribute, although my thread is not a spam thread and I always prefer to report spammers than locking a thread. If a thread is becoming too long and no other useful information added to it, you can lock it, or report it to a moderator to lock it if people are using it to spam.

[Despairo]

When the last reply was 120 days ago, there's will be a warning sign before you want to make a reply, because you're bumping an old thread.

Actually warning sign isn't that important as long as you have something to add, to update or giving a value about the discussion. It doesn't mean when the last reply was 5 days ago, you're can create any post what you want including shitposting. It's better to not make a reply when you don't have anything to contribute, regardless how new or old the thread is.

[DdmrDdmr]

<…>

Responding to a thread that has been lacking activity for quite a while (month or even years) is a context based decision. If reading through you find that you can add something meaningful, then it makes sense to add to the thread (i.e. adding further developments on a given topic being treated, or genuine related questions). One has to calibre properly if it makes sense or not-

Generally speaking, people don’t go bumping oldish threads that much, and if they do, other will notice clearly whether the intent was to say something meaningful or not (and likely subsequently report the post if not).

In the big picture, people don’t really resort much to locking threads themselves. I believe I might have locked a few in Meta when I asked something and got satisfactory replies, and a few time-sensitive threads that made sense to lock, but besides that, the others remain open primarily in case someone needs to add or ask something further down the road, alongside there not being a collective habit of locking them.

One would think that threads that have not been active for a certain amount of time could self-lock, giving the OP the option to reopen them. A mechanism could be devised whereby threads could self-lock by default after x days without any activity (i.e. 90), giving the OP the option to adjust or even remove the default value x.
Nevertheless, I’m sure we could find plenty of counter-arguments to vouch for this not to take place (i.e. can’t add more important related info nor ask valid related questions, it calls for opening new threads rather than building-up further context in an already existing ones, and so forth).

[Upgrade00]

A mechanism could be devised whereby threads could self-lock by default after x days without any activity (i.e. 90), giving the OP the option to adjust or even remove the default value x.

This could be implemented, but would do little to improve the forum, imo.
The way I see it, threads which have little activity is not a problem and usually they just fizzle down to several pages down and are not seen by majority of the forum. Even when bumped, they most likely sink to the bottom soon after.

The spam problem comes from threads which are still being actively discussed daily with no actual contribution. Replies here are just remakes of the ones before and those commenting do not bother to read previous replies and surely cannot read 4-20 pages of posts.
If an autolock feature is added, it would do nothing to reduce spam mega threads.

[Adbitco]

If a thread is not lock doesn't mean it can't be locked or the creator have not received lots of answer. Now, there are some thread that are just meant for discussion whereby it can be open for whom ever to post their contribution, while some are critical topic (questions) which requires urgent feedback and after the poster or creator seems to have been satisfied with the reply and comments then he may decide to lock it. Apparently, if a mod or admin noticed there have been several answers and same comments flowing (Spamming) the thread, they may decides to locked the thread. Lastly, some may be if the topic doesn't belong to the place they posted it or section they posted it, a mod or admin can then decide to move it to proper section and locked the previous board.
Open thread are common at the speculation and discussion sections.

[Maestro75]

If I ask a question and it has been answered, I decided not to lock the thread because some other users may still want to contribute, I like all experienced members on this forum to contribute, although my thread is not a spam thread and I always prefer to report spammers than locking a thread.

This is what makes others also leave their threads open after they have the answer they are looking for because they are expecting certain users to comment on their threads. You expect those you call experienced to post in it when you know you should be locking it and that leaves room for spam posting whether you admit or not. Sometimes the experienced users you want may not even be knowledgeable in the field that question is on. Am not saying all threads should be locked, but those ones asking questions should be locked if their answers are gotten.

[Nwada001]

No time is ever too late to answer unanswered questions or solve issues that are still left to be solved. As an OP, you are always advised to check back to your created topic or thread if it's regarding something that needs solutions and answers and you are not satisfied with what you got. Until the OP gets satisfied with answers from me, the thread is still valid. 

I created a few threads seeking clarification over something, and when I was satisfied with the answer I got, I was advised to close the thread. In cases like this, the purpose of the thread has been achieved and it is required to be closed. 

[Lucius]

Why are some members not locking or closing their threads after they get answers off them? Only very few practice this on this forum.

My opinion is that this is because most of the members of this forum behave very irresponsibly towards such things, and I believe that many are not aware that there is an option to close the topic or that the topic can even be moved to another board. If we take into account that this is an excuse for those I have already mentioned, what about those who are aware that such topics should be reported to the moderator and prevent them from turning into signature spam megathreads.

There is an answer to that question, and it is very simple "reporting is a waste of time", and that is unfortunately the official position of some very influential members of the forum.

[aysg76]

The members ignore locking the thread after they have received the answers to their questions but in certain cases moderators can also lock the thread if they find its having prolonged spammy discussions but in rare cases while others are still not locked.

But as the time passes and there is no active discussion in thread it lies dead under the pile of other threads but if you try to make a reply to that thread you will be given warning that you are replying to very old thread so it's on our own that we should not unnecessarily bump that particular thread and start any spammy conversations.As there is no option for expiry of thread the thread creator should take initiative to lock such threads inactive for lot of time but it's going the same way so not much problem now.

[Jatiluhung]

there are many reasons why an old thread is not locked by the author (OP). like a thread of questions whose answers can vary. and even though it has got many satisfying answers. But maybe there will be a new unique answer some time later.

But a thread needs to be locked if a healthy discussion has turned into a hotbed of spam.

But I've seen a lot of old threads coming back to the surface lately. But those threads in no way turn into Spam spots. And instead there is a healthy discussion that is quite interesting to follow. because the initial topic does have developments that are constantly updated. thus keeping threads from becoming obsolete and worth keeping up with.

like the thread about El salvador. (El Salvador has become the first country to make #Bitcoin legal tender! 🇸🇻) which is still warm and the discussion in it will continue to flow along with updates on developments regarding the adoption of bitcoin in El Salvador and all news related to this matter.

[hatshepsut93]

I would say it depends on the importance and uniqueness of a thread. If it's a thread about some concrete event or idea, it could be okay to revive it even after years, although starting a new threads and mentioning the previous discussion could be a better idea. But if it's a generic "when bull market" or "what happens when all coins are mined" thread, then it's better not to touch it even after a week or so.

[Mate2237]

If you locked a thread because the needed information or the answers have been given, that might lead to another level of spamming because since your thread which would have been a good ground for comments has been locked up so other user who would have been making comments will create threads instead of comments. But if the OP decides to locked it because he or she has gotten the answer then that is an individual thinking, and if she or he likes to open it for more comments, it is all the same.

[AverageGlabella]

When there is nothing else to add. If a topic has already received a answer but you have something to add maybe for future viewers of the topic I think that is ok because you are not only replying to the person who started the topic but the people that search for this information in the following years.

[Ojima-ojo]

From my understanding with regsrds to forum threads, since this is a bitcoin discussion forum there are two aspects we should consider in threads which are.

1: what is the class of the thread, is it a discussion thread, because discussion thread can continue as long as there are new replies that add to the already existing discussion with new information or data updates.

2: the other is a question this type of thread is not expected to go beyond 1-2 pages as it will be assumed the answer to the enquiry would have been provided with a few comments, and if such thread extends to 4-5 pages that is a potential spam mega thread and should be locked.

[LoyceMobile]

When is the right time or date to stop replying to a thread?

If you have to ask, you shouldn't reply.