We need a self-lock feature

Discussion in 'Feedback and Suggestions' started by WBahn, Dec 13, 2015.

  1. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    There are many times that I tell myself that I am not going to participate in a particular thread -- either from the first time I see it or perhaps after participating for a while. But then I see a post that I would normally respond to and I may not even realize that it is in a thread that I told myself (and perhaps even made a post in the thread to the effect) that I was not going to participate any longer. Unsubscribing from the thread might help, but I might still come across it. Plus, I might want to continue watching the thread, just not participate.

    What would be nice would be if there was button where we could self-lock a thread, meaning merely that if WE try to reply to it we get a dialog telling us that we have self-locked it and requiring that we click a button to continue. Since the database already has to maintain individual lists of threads we are subscribed to, this feature would impose very little additional database overhead.

    Perhaps that is something that could be recommended to XenForo.
     
    cmartinez and Hypatia's Protege like this.
  2. nerdegutta

    Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    2,515
    785
    That's not a problem for me, but a nice feature.

    In fear of hi-jacking this thread, I would like some sort of feature to prevent replying to old threads. Recently I've seen a few threads with an interesting topic, but when I see the date, the threads are a few years old. My suggestion is that when a thread reaches a certain "age", only the TS can reply to it. Others will have to start a new thread, and link to the old one.

    The reason only the TS would reply, is if it is a long term project, or a project that needs modifications/revisions. (Then he/she could start a new thread...)
     
    R!f@@ and boatsman like this.
  3. boatsman

    Senior Member

    Jan 17, 2008
    165
    383
    Good idea nerdegutta.
     
    nerdegutta likes this.
  4. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    Supposedly when you try to respond to a thread that is more than a year old (or perhaps a thread in which the most recent post is a year old) it pops up a dialog asking if you really want to post a response to such an old thread. The feature seems to really cut down on the necroposting, but it's also a feature that doesn't seem very stable (in that sometimes it seems to go away and has to be brought back). I suspect that might be due to forum software updates, but I don't know.
     
    BR-549 and nerdegutta like this.
  5. JohnInTX

    Moderator

    Jun 26, 2012
    2,345
    1,028
    It may depend on the particular case. This thread from 2012 was necroposted but is now reanimated from dead tissue - some of the original contributors are back and on the original subject. That one, at least, is doing OK.
     
  6. jpanhalt

    AAC Fanatic!

    Jan 18, 2008
    5,692
    901
    Simply stupid. Just ignore.

    John
     
  7. GopherT

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 23, 2012
    6,035
    3,803
    Unfortunately, you can only ignore people, not threads.

    @WBahn,
    Funny you bring this up. Just a few minutes ago I checked if a tread could be ignored. Not possible. I would prefer an ignore rather than a "personal lock".
     
    spinnaker and OBW0549 like this.
  8. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    Ignore and what I am describing serve two different purposes. I have frequently found myself interested in following a thread, but for whatever reason don't want to be goaded into participating in it any further. But I agree that being able to ignore a thread would be a useful option, too.
     
  9. OBW0549

    Well-Known Member

    Mar 2, 2015
    1,308
    884
    Yup. We need a "SERVPRO" button. Works like their motto, "Like it never even happened." Sends the thread off into hyperspace, never to appear in your browser again...
     
  10. spinnaker

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 29, 2009
    4,884
    1,005

    I really don't understand the issue of not posting to a certain thread. There is such a thing as self control.

    I would MUCH rather have a thread ignore feature. There are threads that go on for days even weeks, pages and pages of posts when the thread should have been resolved in just a few posts. It is really annoying to see them pop up sevveral times a day. There are a couple going on like that right now. And it is just not here. I participate in a bicycle touring forum and there has been too arguments going on for months. One on ultralight touring and the other on bar end shifters. Both a matter of personal preference so the argument will never be resolved.

    As far as necroposting, newbies should not be permitted to necropost. I have not idea what is it with newbies that they are searching old posts and then think they need to provide an answer to someone that might very well be dead by now.
     
  11. GopherT

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 23, 2012
    6,035
    3,803
    The site owner does not want to lock old threads or prevent newbies from posting. If necroposting opportunities are a gateway to getting a new member to sign up, then necroposting it is. They will be reprimanded after their irrevocable membership has been confirmed and potential advertisers can be told that AAC now has n+ 1 members.
     
  12. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    Such a cynical and, as it turns out, incorrect view of things.
     
  13. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    It's not a matter of self control. This is equivalent to saying that browsers shouldn't have the ability to bookmark pages because there is such a thing as remembering where you've been. It's a matter of inadvertently posting to a thread without realizing that it is a thread that you have intended not to post in. That might well be a decision that was made weeks or months (or even years) ago. The same is true of much of the necroposting, except there at least you always do have the opportunity to look and notice that the last post in the thread was from four years ago. But that is easy to miss. It is particularly easy to miss when you are responding to a new post in an old thread because you seldom look beyond the date of the post you are responding to.

    This is merely an artifact of how people come to the forum initially. It is usually the result of doing a Google (or similar) search and so their search results take them to a thread that is years old. Also, the "similar threads" list almost always includes old threads. If you disable that, then you are effectively removing the archival nature of the forum and there are a lot of old threads that have a lot of good information.[/QUOTE]
     
    cmartinez likes this.
  14. spinnaker

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 29, 2009
    4,884
    1,005
    What I thought. But lots of people are providing an answer. I can see searching for an answer and then posting asking if the forum member got the answer because they have a similar issue. But I don't understand why someone found an old thread to which they provided an answer. Or maybe they were simply searching on some else and that came up????
    But why they feel the need to provide an answer to a thread several years old is another question. :eek:
     
  15. dl324

    Distinguished Member

    Mar 30, 2015
    3,242
    619
    That's how I learned about AAC and became a member. I was googling for some EPROM information and saw an interesting post on AAC. I joined and posted to an old post because either some incorrect information was posted or I could answer the question. In either case, if the OP or people involved in the thread were still receiving email, they would have seen the clarifying post I made.

    Fortunately I didn't have a bunch of members jumping down my throat and ripping me a new one because I posted to an old thread; if that had happened, I might not have stayed.

    I joined Vintage Computer Forum or something like that for the same reason. I gave some information, which was truthful and accurate because I happened to be a moderator on the Willem EPROM Programmer site, that some senior members and moderators didn't like. They started making personal attacks (like I stunk) and I never visited that forum again.
     
  16. boatsman

    Senior Member

    Jan 17, 2008
    165
    383
    @dl324
    Yeah, I know the problem, try changing your deodorant!
     
  17. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    It's an interesting dynamic. I certainly understand it when the feature that prompts them to confirm that they want to post to an old thread isn't working -- then I'm sure that most of the time they just don't realize they are doing so. But when it IS working? I just shake my head. I suspect some of them are just trying to be good new members and contribute what and where they can and they just don't think through the implications. And, truth be told, are the implications really that bad. Yeah, some member that hasn't been active for several years gets an e-mail from AAC. So what? It might even prompt them to become active again. They can always just ignore it. Worst case they get annoyed enough to come to AAC and unsubscribe from that (and all other) threads or change their notification options. The ones I find really annoying are when they necrohijack -- they not only find an old post, but then they respond to it with their own question that is sometimes utterly unrelated to the thread/post they are responding to. What the hell?!
     
  18. strantor

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 3, 2010
    4,302
    1,988
    +1
    It seems to me like petitioning IGLOO to provide a beer cooler with a breathalyzer on it. But you can still get a beer out of it if you really want one, even if you're totally sauced, as long as you press a button to acknowledge that you're already too far gone but don't care.

    On the topic of necroposting, i never have, and still don't understand why so many people have a problem with it. What's the big deal? Can anyone explain WHY a post over 1yr old should be locked? The forum is an eternal public record; who knows, I might come across this very thread 30yrs from now. When people google a topic and one of the results is a thread on this forum, AFAIK google doesn't search for the most current result on the forum, but the most "relevant" thread, which might be 10+y/o. Shouldn't we strive to keep our portion of the eternal record of the internet as complete and accurate as possible? If we have wrong or incomplete info that has been sitting on a shelf for 5 years left uncorrected, and someone joins the forum just to contribute to that deficiency, shouldn't we welcome it? You might argue that "the TS/OP was a one-hit wonder; he came here with one question and then never posted again. It's highky unlikely that he saw the reply and his issue is likely sorted out already, 5 years later." True, but as this is (excuse the repetition) an eternal record, it's possible that the OP/TS is not the only person to benefit from the thread in the past 5 yrs or the next 5, or 50 years. Its possible that several people have, or will, come across that thread in search of their own answers (that's likely how the necroposter came across it in the first place) and walk away with the answers which were given 5 years ago without signing up and reposting the same question, and the answers they walk away with might be totally wrong, or half-ass.

    I guess I'm the minority; I welcome necroposting. I just wish the forum software handled it better. I think that's why most people are turned off by it; they think that their issue is with necroposting in general, but really their frustration is with how it's handled. I know I get pretty frustrated when I read through 3 pages of what i think is current convo (because I fail to read the timestamps that are right in my face) and get all the way to the end, only to realize I was reading 3y/o content and the reply i was planning is pointless. Now, if I had clicked on the thread and the 3y/o posts were highlighted in red to force my awareness, i would skip to the end, see what the necropost is about, and if it's applicable (ex: "hey I'm having the same problem with my treadmill board. I already checked the things mentioned in post #9 but I'm still having the same problem") then I would go back and see what the OP described, what troubleshooting steps have been tried so far, and pick up where we left 3 years ago. No problem there (at least i don't see one). Why should we recommend this necroposter to start his own thread? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep new, relevant info in one thread, rather than scattering it about the internet in a bunch of disjointed threads, each of which containing only small pieces of a puzzle?

    If i were to click on the thread, see the red "necro-background, skip to the end, and find some crap about ultraviolet illumination of PCB material on thread about guitar amplifier mods, i would flag the necropost for moderation, for separation into a new thread .
     
  19. WBahn

    Thread Starter Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,743
    4,795
    So, in other words, you don't see why it might be useful to have the forum software bring something to your attention for which there are no obvious telltales (i.e., I don't recall every single thread I've decided I don't want to participate in any more, but still want to read), yet want the forum software to bring something to your attention for which there are obvious telltales (the dates on the posts).

    The suggestion has absolutely nothing to do with self-control. It is merely a recommendation for a way to flag something that we want to be reminded of down the road.
     
  20. strantor

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 3, 2010
    4,302
    1,988
    Fair enough, I concede. My suggestion isn't any more beneficial for you, than yours is for me. Sorry for detracting from your suggestion.
     
Loading...