Why do "old" threads get locked automatically?

#1: Post by **cuppa** » July 15th, 2019, 9:00 pm

Why do "old" threads get locked automatically on this forum? It would be so much easier to keep all relevant questions and answers about a topic on one thread. I just tried asking a follow up question in Coffee Freezing Best Practices, but could not since the thread is locked.

#2: Post by HB » July 15th, 2019, 9:13 pm

See Why close old threads from new comments? for an explanation.

#3: Post by **liquidmetal** » July 15th, 2019, 9:13 pm

Here is another comprehensive post describing necromancy (reviving old threads) in forums.

https://communitybuilding.stackexchange ... ve-threads

July 15th, 2019, 9:16 pm

There are few good arguments to back that policy. Also, why would you edit my post/title without my explicit permission or a public note saying that you had edited it? That is also not good practice. And where is my actual question now?

#5: Post by **pcrussell50** » July 15th, 2019, 9:28 pm

There are all kinds of policies possible in the administration of a forum. One of my favorites is to encourage the concept of "bring the tech". IOW, as a dispute becomes ugly, a moderator might side ever so slightly with the person who is bringing facts or rational analysis in support of his opinion, over one who speaks out of assumption, urban legend and folklore.

-Peter

#6: Post by HB » July 15th, 2019, 9:53 pm

cuppa wrote:And where is my actual question now?

I thought you raised a good point above and didn't want it getting "lost" in a completely unrelated thread, so I split your main question to Ideal Freezer Temperature For Coffee Beans and then send you a PM with a link.

July 16th, 2019, 6:52 am

Okay, but it's not good practice to edit members' post and make it appear as though they had posted something they had not. Because, once this is established, you will no longer have the protection afforded by the Communications Decency Act of 1996, and you can be held culpable for member's posts because there is no longer a clear divide between what's your contribution and what is not.

You should also revisit the locking old thread policy, or least have a discussion about it. It can be a good policy in very topical and current forums, but in hobbyist forums discussing very specific things that don't change over time -- be it freezing coffee or discussing the flavor profiles of a particular blend over the years, it is so much better to keep everything in one place (unless you would rather have a higher forum thread count).

#8: Post by HB » July 16th, 2019, 8:04 am

cuppa wrote:Okay, but it's not good practice to edit members' post and make it appear as though they had posted something they had not. Because, once this is established, you will no longer have the protection afforded by the Communications Decency Act of 1996, and you can be held culpable for member's posts because there is no longer a clear divide between what's your contribution and what is not.

Since you brought up up Section 230, Citizen Media Law Project has a good summary of it in Immunity for Online Publishers Under the Communications Decency Act. Specifically:

2. If you exercise traditional editorial functions over user submitted content, such as deciding whether to publish, remove, or edit material, you will not lose your immunity unless your edits materially alter the meaning of the content.

I didn't materially change your post by splitting two distinct questions into two threads.

cuppa wrote:...in hobbyist forums discussing very specific things that don't change over time -- be it freezing coffee or discussing the flavor profiles of a particular blend over the years, it is so much better to keep everything in one place (unless you would rather have a higher forum thread count).

I agree that some "collector" threads encourage interesting community contributions (e.g., Post a pic of your home espresso setup), but they can engender watercooler chatty behaviors. Admittedly, I frequently skip right by megathreads since they tend to be repetitive.

My main interest is encouraging wider participation and more in-depth conversations. My secondary interest is making this site search-friendly, since there's less repetitive conversations if members/visitors can find prior answers. Threads that go on for hundreds of pages are certainly interesting for those who joined in early; for latecomers, it's a bit daunting to find prior answers, so they'll just (unknowingly) ask the same question that's been asked/answered before.

Of course, that can happen with separate threads, too, but it's less likely -- and there's the benefit that moderators/senior members can point the new member to an existing top-level thread versus a hard-to-find, single helpful point in post 392 of a long, meandering thread.

July 16th, 2019, 8:50 am

HB wrote:Since you brought up up Section 230, Citizen Media Law Project has a good summary of it in Immunity for Online Publishers Under the Communications Decency Act. Specifically:

I didn't materially change your post by splitting two distinct questions into two threads.

I agree that some "collector" threads encourage interesting community contributions (e.g., Post a pic of your home espresso setup), but they can engender watercooler chatty behaviors. Admittedly, I frequently skip right by megathreads since they tend to be repetitive.

My main interest is encouraging wider participation and more in-depth conversations. My secondary interest is making this site search-friendly, since there's less repetitive conversations if members/visitors can find prior answers. Threads that go on for hundreds of pages are certainly interesting for those who joined in early; for latecomers, it's a bit daunting to find prior answers, so they'll just (unknowingly) ask the same question that's been asked/answered before.

Of course, that can happen with separate threads, too, but it's less likely -- and there's the benefit that moderators/senior members can point the new member to an existing top-level thread versus a hard-to-find, single helpful point in post 392 of a long, meandering thread.

Thanks, but I was referring to something slightly different. As an administrator of the site, you are protected by the CDA, but only as long as you do not materially contribute to the content, since then you would become a content provider. If you routinely edit members' posts without any public notice (and you do not retain detailed server records for the edits for a long time), it blurs the lines.

I think the point about making it search-friendly is well-taken, but since you can search by posts and not just threads, it is not a massive advantage (but I acknowledge that there is indeed an advantage there). However, locking old threads automatically is not the right solution to the problem you had mentioned. Good moderating is. Locking old/inactive threads also does not stop long, meandering threads from occurring -- people may not let the threads go inactive, like the thread you had linked. All it does is populate the sub-forum with many similar threads, and impede good discussion if someone wants to discuss/disagree with a point made in an old, locked thread that he/she had just seen.

#10: Post by **mountmustache** » July 16th, 2019, 9:01 am

cuppa wrote:You should also revisit the locking old thread policy, or least have a discussion about it.

Isn't that what he did by giving this question its own thread?

I enjoy the megathreads every now and again, but I think the current policy is a good one. When people google coffee questions, HB is almost always at the top. If the answer to the question is in a two page thread, it'll be found. If it's in a 10 or 100 page thread that's been going on for 5 years, that person just starts a new topic with a question that's been answered already, which happens enough as it is.

Frankly, this forum is pretty strict and I like that because it's helped avoid an eternal September