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

[khatarnak]

Real problem is people digging up dead threads just to make one more campaign post.
If someone keeps bumping old inactive threads they should get a temporary ban.
It will stop the problem much better than locking thousands of old threads.

[EluguHcman]

Real problem is people digging up dead threads just to make one more campaign post.
If someone keeps bumping old inactive threads they should get a temporary ban.
It will stop the problem much better than locking thousands of old threads.

Of course banning (temporary) is already set of penalty that spammers earns when they constantly violates the forum policy.
Definitely users exceeded the grace of pardons and still keep spamming on the inactive old threads, they have always ended up on banning sanctions.

To correct you in an impression, it is not always users targeting post count on signature campaigns that do this, it is usually newbies who think they can learn better from the bottom pages and the ones looking for easy post to spam on can also fall victim. Not just signature campaign users.

[Mpamaegbu]

2. Report necrobumpers, and their posts will be deleted, and the thread will sink back to where it was.

I don't think this will work in realistic term. The reason being that such bumps could even be coming from an OP who's into providing services like running signature campaigns or P2P but stopped providing such services for some time due to unforeseen circumstances and then decides to restart. I don't think such a person should go open a new thread. They ought to continue from where they stopped.

[NotATether]

I think it would be an unnecessary step to automatically lock threads that have remained inactive for a set period of time.

And there are negative consequences to this. Imagine someone lost their keys in some sort of accident and made a thread asking for help to recover them. Then 5 years later, he somehow finds the method to recover them himself, and wants to post about it on Bitcointalk. You wouldn't want to lock the thread in that case, even if it is so old.

[Silikiem]

Most old thread could serve as reference purposes for new threads or even the ones yet to be created. Believe me, years to come there will be new developments or situations which could be resolved or made possible through references gotten from older threads, and most times to reduce the level of repetition of topics or discussions around the forum as most new users might wish to create a thread directly similar to older ones and to avoid this kind of regression there’s need to keep old threads unlocked.

[EluguHcman]

I think it would be an unnecessary step to automatically lock threads that have remained inactive for a set period of time.

And there are negative consequences to this. Imagine someone lost their keys in some sort of accident and made a thread asking for help to recover them. Then 5 years later, he somehow finds the method to recover them himself, and wants to post about it on Bitcointalk. You wouldn't want to lock the thread in that case, even if it is so old.

That is also a good point to considered because locking the thread will cause negative traffics where there may be helpful informations that is to bring solution to ones problems.

If the OP could later spot the solution to his problem as maybe stated in the thread and needed to update it in the thread so others can also share the experience as knowledge, other users who may later in the long time might find solution or helpful information to the thread and may need to also update it in the thread.
But what would be your suggestions in a similar thread which after the OP or thread has been satisfied with the needs (solution) as demanded in the thread, is there going to be necessity to further discussions? Of course such cases could linger to spamming.

So we should also think the otherwise and see how some threads should be regulated even if it is not the matter of old or older thread anymore because awakening old and inactive threads with nothing new is why the thought of locking the inactive threads comes in.

[Doan9269]

I will suggest we have to be board and topic specific on this discussion, now what do I mean, if a particular thread is only pointing about discussions that any random person can contribute or suggest ideas to what is being discussed, it shows that once it gets to a certain limit the moderator can decided to lock the trade to avoid spamming, especially when it is above page 10 or 15.

But some threads will not be advisable to be locked when a user comes on board to ask about the particular question and later gets enough discussions about that particular thread, later he may want to give an update upon what he created is resolved or not, we can see some users leaving for some time later coming back to pop up their existing thread for updates.

This makes lucking a thread by the moderator what should be critically considered and as well not to apply a single approach on this regard, I already noticed this is happening on the forum regarding some discussions being locked once they reach a maximum of 10 to 15 pages especially on the gambling board discussions, which is quiet understandable and that is why I initially mentioned that we have to be topic and board specific when considering for this to be in place.

[Supreme Donvic]

You need to understand that new people are coming to this forum, and when they come to this forum some of them usually do a lot of research in this forum, and they check a lot of topics especially old topics and when they see the one that interests them they comment on it and I don't see that as something wrong, even if the thread is 7 years old it should not be locked because discussions can still come up there, as long as those discussion that are coming up there are very reasonable and not spam then it's okay by me.

[Justbillywitt]

Why I don’t really support this idea is that, those threads, and the discussions that were discussed in them were made not just to be of help to the people that participated in it back then, they are there to also be of help to future readers of the threads. If someone who’s going through the threads has a question or something to add to the thread, what are they going to do?

[Cryptoprincess101]

Real problem is people digging up dead threads just to make one more campaign post.
If someone keeps bumping old inactive threads they should get a temporary ban.
It will stop the problem much better than locking thousands of old threads.

It's so annoying when you see people bumping old threads that has been inactive for years, but the most annoying part is that they don't even post something new, it will still be a continuous spam of things that was already discussed in the thread. I think a warning should be given to those who bump old threads without any meaningful new thing that they are adding then if they continue such act, they can get a temporary ban. Locking old threads is not bad especially if the creator of that thread is satisfied with the replies of people but moderators can also lock a thread if it is leading to spamming.

[Floxynice]

Real problem is people digging up dead threads just to make one more campaign post.
If someone keeps bumping old inactive threads they should get a temporary ban.
It will stop the problem much better than locking thousands of old threads.

It's so annoying when you see people bumping old threads that has been inactive for years, but the most annoying part is that they don't even post something new, it will still be a continuous spam of things that was already discussed in the thread. I think a warning should be given to those who bump old threads without any meaningful new thing that they are adding then if they continue such act, they can get a temporary ban. Locking old threads is not bad especially if the creator of that thread is satisfied with the replies of people but moderators can also lock a thread if it is leading to spamming.

First things first, if a thread has served its purpose, it is okay for the thread to be locked. However, if such a thread is left open, considering the relevance of the topic and the possibility of new knowledge being added to it, it is important that anyone who bumps such a thread after a long period of inactivity should provide the latest updates on the topic or even ask questions seeking clarity that are still relevant to the topic. At least that is better than creating an entirely new thread to talk about what has already been discussed in an existing old thread.

People are free to report posts that spam such threads. Such posts should be deleted immediately by the moderators.

[BitBakerr1]

OP what if the thread is where important information is being shared once in every 5 months or year?
I think what we should be more concerned about are posts that are spam and not people posting on old threads, locking old threads won’t stop spam if that’s what you are thinking about, I think we should be bringing real solutions to help stop spam not things like this, if your opinion is honored don’t you think it will affect the purpose or main goal of a discussion forum like bitcointalk forum.
Let’s try to think about the disadvantages in what ever idea we bring out.

[MarryWithBTC]

Op, @EluguHcman, can you lead by example?

I trust this topic has served the purpose it was created, majority of the thread participants do not agree with you.

Can you lock the thread?

[JollyGood]

Your example is one of many that demonstrate why the proposal would most probably not even be considered. Even if a policy such as one the OP is proposing were to be implemented, would a universal time limit apply to every thread or would it vary depending on variables (including the OP, board, subject, content and context).

And there are negative consequences to this. Imagine someone lost their keys in some sort of accident and made a thread asking for help to recover them. Then 5 years later, he somehow finds the method to recover them himself, and wants to post about it on Bitcointalk. You wouldn't want to lock the thread in that case, even if it is so old.

[PrivacyG]

And there are negative consequences to this. Imagine someone lost their keys in some sort of accident and made a thread asking for help to recover them. Then 5 years later, he somehow finds the method to recover them himself, and wants to post about it on Bitcointalk. You wouldn't want to lock the thread in that case, even if it is so old.

There are Wallets that may go inactive in development and all of a sudden get revived by the same team, years later.  There are investigations on fraud schemes that may have no new findings for years and all of a sudden new evidence is found.  Hell.  Maybe someone died and a Member wanted to necro bump their Topic only to make the announcement.

There are a lot of reasons not to lock them.  When ever I noticed a necro bumper, I soon never saw their name around again.

[Dreadboost]

Some posts may be abandoned, but their existence is important in case there is an important message that someone wants to share without the consent of the OP. 

Some topics indeed need to be locked to avoid spam on the board. It is the duty of the moderators to do their job. Topics that do not need to have long discussions should be locked after four pages. 

Also, if a thread has to be opened, the OP will have to meet the moderators or create a new thread with a reference to the old thread.

[Bounty Hunter Trax45]

I do not believe that the automatic locking of old threads is an effective solution either. There are many threads which are old but still relevant to this day, particularly in the Bitcoin and Technical forums. In cases where the user has new ideas, fresh data, and a new outlook on the subject matter, continuing an old discussion rather than opening up a new thread might be more beneficial.

It does not depend on how old the thread is but on whether the answer to the post is substantial. Bumping a very old thread to say I agree is pointless and generates useless noise while a substantial answer will remain relevant no matter what year the discussion started.

[Agbe]

I have read in a place that if the information you want to pass to the public is related to the thread topic and it is important, it contribute to knowledge, you can bump the thread and I believed those things happened mostly in the technical board and the wallet board. But for other boards, if the information is still contributing to knowledge, you can still bump it with the information. But if is just related and there is no impact on the already existing thread, you can create a new topic for it .