Older inactive/abandoned threads lasted for period of duration should be locked

[EluguHcman]

Please give it a grace if this is not the right board to post this thread.

Straight to the point... I found the observation of @Coyster In this thread as I quote below very important to treat as necessary if at all it is invalid or valueless to bump old threads especially ones like this that had been inactive or abandoned for years.

*...*

Why did you have to bump a thread that is almost seven years old, just to post information that isn't new, nor adds anything to the topic. Even if you had anything new to say about this subject, you ought to have started a new thread.

I don't think the users who posted after you noticed, but guys this is a topic from many years ago, there's no need to continue this conversation here, and i don't know why @atomicpay2 had to bump this thread.

Sequence to this kind of necro-bumper awakening old threads as @Coyster has said it all, I think to control such experience from reoccurring, I would suggest post that had been inactive in a specific duration for example 2-5 years plus should be locked else the allowance would encourage spamming.

[JeromeTash]

1. Not all inactive old threads need to be locked in case of any future updates so I doubt what you are suggesting will be implemented
2. Report necrobumpers, and their posts will be deleted, and the thread will sink back to where it was. Otherwise, your suggestion means mods would have to look at thousands of threads, which is no easy task.

[Nwada001]

That idea is nice, but there are also threads that hold valid information, and discussion can come up at any time. Some persons prefer to continue an already existing discussion; that is, create a new one. Such a thread, even if it’s old, should remain open, and bumping up a thread should come with information that has a direct update to do with what’s being discussed on the thread. Where such is lacking, you can easily report such bumping to mods, and there is a high chance of it getting deleted I do that from time to time and some of such reports are marked as handled.

[KingsDen]

It is difficult for mods to oversee every thread, determine the old ones and the ones that are irrelevant in order to lock them.

Meanwhile, how will you determine that a particular thread has lost its relevance. For the particular thread in question whose title is "Not Your Key, Not Your Coins", has the slogan changed? If no, it therefore means that the thread could still be relevant and users who have new experience or testimonies of Not your keys, not your coins will express it in the thread.

I do not support necro bumping, but I also do not support any hard code rule of locking threads from the old.

[Karl_3000]

2. Report necrobumpers, and their posts will be deleted, and the thread will sink back to where it was. Otherwise, your suggestion means mods would have to look at thousands of threads, which is no easy task.

If the person that bump the thread is reported, it is very possible that the moderator will not delete his post because what he posted there is not a spam. It is still about not your keys not your bitcoin but also warning people to protect their keys for the people not to lose their coins.

Can you also see that the topic and the bump were both July 14 and 13.

[Coyster]

Nah, this is not a matter that requires new rules or fixes. There are so many obvious reasons why Theymos wouldn't consider this suggestion for even a second.

I believe users should take responsibility in this one, and not the mods or the admin. I mean, it should be easy to spot a necro-bumped thread, particularly when it is just of a few pages like the scenario in the OP. Once spotted and it's spam, you report the post or call out the user and end the discussion, problem solved.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

Sequence to this kind of necro-bumper awakening old threads as @Coyster has said it all, I think to control such experience from reoccurring, I would suggest post that had been inactive in a specific duration for example 2-5 years plus should be locked else the allowance would encourage spamming.

I'm sorry to say that I totally disagree with you regarding this proposal that old threads should be locked in other prevent it from been bump just like @atomicpay2 just did. Because to me, I think the context of the thread that is been bump is one criteria that should determine If should it be locked immediately or allowed for further discussions. Because to be frankly speaking, I see absolutely nothing with bumping an ever-green topic such as "Not your key, Not your Bitcoin" for discussion again on this forum, because this is one topic that will remain relevant even in the next 20years to 50years, as long as Bitcoin still exists for discussion.

So in conclusion, the content of the thread is what should determine if it should be locked immediately or allowed for a while for discussion.

[Karl_3000]

@EluguHcman, your proposal rejected.

Nah, this is not a matter that requires new rules or fixes. There are so many obvious reasons why Theymos wouldn't consider this suggestion for even a second.

The thread that he used as an example is not a good example at all.

I believe users should take responsibility in this one, and not the mods or the admin. I mean, it should be easy to spot a necro-bumped thread, particularly when it is just of a few pages like the scenario in the OP. Once spotted and it's spam, you report the post or call out the user and end the discussion, problem solved.

But that is not spam or how is it a spam? I do not see anything old on the thread. There are many new spam that people are posting today that is worse than the post. What the person posted is better than what many people are posting on new threads today.

[EluguHcman]

1. Not all inactive old threads need to be locked in case of any future updates so I doubt what you are suggesting will be implemented

Your contribution is considered sensible but in a situation where not all needs to be locked, how do you dictate which is worth leaving opened and locked if they were all of quality threads?

Perhaps future updates from the OP can be unarguable which should attract a new dimension to continue the discussion while updates from users (repliers) may should reference the OP in a different thread just as the one existed in the threads that got me brining this up here.
Nevertheless, your opinion is still considered valid.

2. Report necrobumpers, and their posts will be deleted, and the thread will sink back to where it was. Otherwise, your suggestion means mods would have to look at thousands of threads, which is no easy task.

Then the Mod is not just going to react to the necro bumpers alone who reactivated the thread but others who may have followed suit just like the one experience in my reference thread.

So Mod would have to be on active task specifically on that thread to delete as many others that will be posted after the necro bumpers post until the post fell of the front page or looses visibility.

[Lida93]

I don't think the users who posted after you noticed, but guys this is a topic from many years ago, there's no need to continue this conversation here, and i don't know why @atomicpay2 had to bump this thread. [/b]

It's a good suggestion you have made but you should also understand that there are users that don't have the culture of recreating  a new post when they're aware that there's an already existing posts about same news that was being discussed on some time ago. For them it might seem like a duplicate, it doesn't matter the duration it has remained dormant, they just believe it would make much sense continuing the new information inside the already existing thread.

For good example here, look at this Re: German government having second thoughts. , though  created in 2024 but was revisited by OgNasty  this year (2 years after) when a fresh update relating to such thread came up this year.  
This has to be one of the reasons of leaving old thread open and not for encouraging spam.

[Churchillvv]

Yeah I understand it’s annoying to see old threads that are long buried brought back not for a good reason just because a user was scrolling and found them just to make a post that is more or less useless however in common sense it shouldn’t have been done but logically it’s not a crime not a spam but just the content of the bumper is the problem. Infact we just need to go with the follow of the forum some times not to shoot ourselves on the leg by requesting new rules but however users who do that should either stop or just be ignored as long as they are not making good contribution.

[JeromeTash]

1. Not all inactive old threads need to be locked in case of any future updates so I doubt what you are suggesting will be implemented

Your contribution is considered sensible but in a situation where not all needs to be locked, how do you dictate which is worth leaving opened and locked if they were all of quality threads?

My point is they should keep them open. Whenever the need to moderate them comes up, just report to the moderators, and they will either delete the meaningless necro posts or lock the thread. For example, you should have reported the necro post and the spam that happened afterwards. The mod was going to lock that thread.

2. Report necrobumpers, and their posts will be deleted, and the thread will sink back to where it was. Otherwise, your suggestion means mods would have to look at thousands of threads, which is no easy task.

Then the Mod is not just going to react to the necro bumpers alone who reactivated the thread but others who may have followed suit just like the one experience in my reference thread.

So Mod would have to be on active task specifically on that thread to delete as many others that will be posted after the necrobumper's post until the post fell of the front page or loses visibility.

This has happened to me before. I unknowingly responded to a thread that was necrobumped without me realizing the date, and the mod deleted the necro post and my reply as well.

Secondly for a necro post to get deleted, it was clarified that it has to be off-topic or low value

Regarding necro posting, if the necro post is substantial (doesn't break the rule especially rule 1 and 2 (2014/07/21 version)), then it's OK.

[IjawMan]

2. Report necrobumpers, and their posts will be deleted, and the thread will sink back to where it was. Otherwise, your suggestion means mods would have to look at thousands of threads, which is no easy task.

So Mod would have to be on active task specifically on that thread to delete as many others that will be posted after the necro bumpers post until the post fell of the front page or looses visibility.

Mods can not be active every where in the forum and con not do this all-in-one cumbersome task you are giving them.

If you were a mod you will understand this yourself. You do not know how many old post gets awakened each day in the forum which can be hundreds.

A plus to helping them is why the report to mod button is provided to help make their job easier and less stressful.

[EluguHcman]

Yeah I understand it’s annoying to see old threads that are long buried brought back not for a good reason just because a user was scrolling and found them just to make a post that is more or less useless however in common sense it shouldn’t have been done but logically it’s not a crime not a spam but just the content of the bumper is the problem. Infact we just need to go with the follow of the forum some times not to shoot ourselves on the leg by requesting new rules but however users who do that should either stop or just be ignored as long as they are not making good contribution.

Your contribution is another honest one if I must say as you have put all necessary figures into records. However, if you suggests that there is no necessity to call on forum rules readjustment even at when necessary, how do we fix or cope with circumstances like this were there is no policy guiding such scenarios that users bumpers on dead threads?

I think it is still logical that if it is not guided, only those who understands what seem right will abide by your suggestions while newbies and the ignorance may keep it up.
As you may also know, not every users will admit or acknowledge that the thread was bumped especially when users are after giving accounts of their post counts.

Some are naturally unaware that the post was revived after it begins to trend in the first page.

[notocactus]

Please give it a grace if this is not the right board to post this thread.

Straight to the point... I found the observation of @Coyster In this thread as I quote below very important to treat as necessary if at all it is invalid or valueless to bump old threads especially ones like this that had been inactive or abandoned for years.

Why did you have to bump a thread that is almost seven years old, just to post information that isn't new, nor adds anything to the topic. Even if you had anything new to say about this subject, you ought to have started a new thread.

It's unlike should or should not.

It's problem when posters don't read, just post and don't mind to read OP or some posts after OP or latest posts. It's because they only see the topic title, and jump immediately to writing their posts. Their purposes, you can guess easily?

It's for filling posting quota.
Is it anything to complain?
Report them, that's enough.

Like my thread [Mega resources for newbies] Check here, find most of your need, before asking. Should it be locked by moderator if there is no new posts in the last 5 months (it actually is) or longer?
It should not be locked this way, but you see I proactively locked my thread to avoid spammers joining it.