Old threads

I typed what follows below as a reply to the old thread on books that was brought back after two years of inactivity. I realized that my replying to it was a violation of what I was suggesting we not do so I am starting this new thread to encourage we do what we can do to eliminate the revival of old threads. Just my opinion:

Again I find myself in a minority opinion on the matter but this sort of confusion could be prevented by the owners of Coin Talk by limiting the time we have to reply to old threads. New members may want to look at what was said here two/five/ten years ago but they do not need to reply bringing back a thread. In addition to situations like post by our deceased friend there is the real possibility that things have changed since we all posted. It would be quite possible to start a new thread on the same subject which the rest of us could update as we saw fit.

All that is required would be all threads to be locked 6 months after the first post or even after the last update which would allow individual's marathon threads (Oki's Hardian threads come to mind). I know some forum software packages offer this feature but I do not know details of the one used by Coin Talk. For the record, I don't like these long threads either since I have to plod through twenty pages to find what I said/showed previously when the latest update returns to a subject covered long ago.

This only happens occasionally and also could be handled if we all would pay attention to the dates on threads before we bring back the long gone posts. If you feel the need to discuss something from an old thread, start a similar new one for the benefit of new members not around for the old one and for the current feelings from the old crowd who are still here.

How do you feel? Has this been addressed by the list owners who decided not to save us from ourselves? The Ancient group (hereafter known as the 'more trouble than they are worth bunch') did get a change separating us from modern World coins. Is this a way to improve this forum which we have come to consider our home?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't have strong feelings about it but it would be simple enough to start a new thread and in that first post also provide a link to the old thread if it is relevant.

 

It does seem like there have been a rash of revived threads lately. I wouldn't mind so much if the new post was relevant, but it seems often it is someone answering a question which had been addressed four years ago. I can't say I know what the solution is...

 

Keeping discussions current and not having to wade through pages and pages in one thread are good enough reasons I think to have some sort of limit.

 

I also believe a time limit is advisable.

 

I'm torn... there are some really informative old threads that are worth keeping around.

 

Time limit seems reasonable. Like TIF I don't have strong feelings about it either. Perhaps a moderator will chime in.

 

I don't think anyone is advocating the deletion of threads, just limiting how long you can post in old ones after no activity.

 

I don't mind grave digging. What's the point of creating a new chapter on an existing discussion, so the conttribution of past posters can't be seen?

Being interested in a subject should be a timeless thing. I really don't see the problem of bringing up old threads, especially since we aren't always engaging in heated debates on these forums.

 

What is wrong with reviving an old thread?

If you are interested others may be also.

I have seen it a number of times lately, and they were threads that I missed in the past, but enjoyed reading today.

 

Aw, shucks! You guys are taking all of the fun out of it. I don't know how many times someone has posted in extensive detail to an old, old thread, and we get to say, "Did you know this thread is 5 years old?"

Chris

 

Perhaps my best answer is not to look at postings to old threads (past the first page?) so they won't bother me.

 

You really enjoy some warped stuff.....me too.

 

+1

 

Threads that are still "alive" such as the "post all your Hadrians" on which people post every so and so should stay open
Maybe threads that haven't got any answer for a while (to be decided) might be closed...or not. On Forvm, there is a very simple feature : when someone writes an answer to a thread that hasn't been active for more than 120 days, they can see a message in red warning them about

Just my two cents
Q

 

Yah, we're all geeky and I'm pretty sure that there are no rules ... the only rule should be => don't make any extra geeky rules!!

 

Speak for yourself! I know you're geeky, but, me? I'm the coolest dude I know (I just don't know very many people).

 

i don't have a strong opinion on this one way or the other, but i think i'd prefer a lock after 6 months of no activity or something similar. there have been a couple times i've seen a coin, thought it looked pretty cool...went to hit the like button and saw i already had. for a second or two i'm confused, then i see it's a thread from two years ago...lol!

 

Guilty as charged. Revived the 7 year old thread 'Cabinet Friction or Wear'. Please note, it was the fact that this old thread was still in existence that lead me to Coin Talk. Came across the thread while searching out the internet on 'Cabinet Friction', liked the info that was posted and joined CT.
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/cabinet-friction-stacking-or-wear.41023/

 

I don't mind reviving old threads. In some cases, for example, with the Sol Invictus thread that's been revived almost every year for like 6 years, I think it's pretty great.

Worst case, I suppose, you can always link back to the old threads.