Why closed?

[KenJackson]

I don't understand.

abhiram7 just posted a thread, Standard I/O redirection in linux, in which he asked a question about forking in Linux.

What's the solution to the question?
And why was the thread summarily slammed shut?

[techieMoe]

I don't understand.

abhiram7 just posted a thread, Standard I/O redirection in linux, in which he asked a question about forking in Linux.

What's the solution to the question?
And why was the thread summarily slammed shut?

When either a user or a moderator marks a post as "Solved" the thread closes automatically. I've re-opened it.

[simon]

can this policy (of automatically closing "solved" threads) be reviewed? i think it's an unfortunate policy because the original poster may (a) mark a thread as solved without giving any information for future readers with similar problems (which is what prompted me to post this: i was unable to ask an o.p. to elaborate on "i fixed it myself"), (b) mark a thread as solved because an adequate solution has been posted; yet if the thread were left open, a much better solution could be posted by someone else, and (c) it's not helpful to users searching for information if their searches hit several threads, some of which are out-of-date time-wasters, while others are up-to-date with correct information: leaving solved threads open makes it more likely that useful updates (like "there's a better driver available now...") will be appended to an existing thread, rather than having to be posted somewhere else, leaving the existing thread as an irritating piece of misinformation.

even in terms of answering the thread creators' questions this situation isn't ideal (they might receive better support if their marking threads as "solved" didn't throw up an obstacle to follow-ups), but in terms of the forums being a useful resource for others (who may hit posts via google, etc.), i think this policy could be a problem.

[oxf]

can this policy (of automatically closing "solved" threads) be reviewed? i .

even in terms of answering the thread creators' questions this situation isn't ideal (they might receive better support if their marking threads as "solved" didn't throw up an obstacle to follow-ups), but in terms of the forums being a useful resource for others (who may hit posts via google, etc.), i think this possues come out of I calicy could be a problem.

FWIW if I've posted a question and its been answered to my satisfaction I'd prefer discussion to be closed.
If needed a new thread can always be started

[oz]

I'm personally not a fan in most cases of everyone bringing their own issues to someone else's thread. Users do have the option to mark their own threads SOLVED and they can reopen them if they should later decide that the problem was not solved to their satisfaction. In the end, I'm generally more in favor of users with computer problems creating their own threads rather than dog piling on an existing thread. Otherwise, the "me too" effect could go on practically forever.

[simon]

yeah, that's the basic difference i'm pointing to here. by talking about threads as though they belonged to the original posters ("their own threads") it does indeed seem entirely reasonable for the thread to be closed if the o.p. marks it solved without explaining how: the original poster is happy, and since it's his/her thread, case closed. on the other hand, i'm thinking of the threads as "everyone's" in the sense that they can be a resource for other readers.

still, you're right that "the 'me too' effect could go on practically forever", and i admit that this can be just as much of a nuisance on some forums (e.g. the gentoo or ubuntu user forums, which can have threads that go on for dozens of pages, with maybe one page worth of useful information buried inside them) as the problem of multiple out-of-date threads. i guess it's a case of pros and cons to either approach, and if this is how most people like things to be done in these forums, i'll get used to it!

[oz]

The "solved/closed" issue for threads is currently under discussion in the admin forum to see how the board admins feel about it, so we should soon know how these threads will be handled in the future.

Thanks to all for the feedback.

[Jonathan183]

1. a prompt when marking a thread as closed asking if the solution can/has been posted in the thread before closing.
and/or
2. leave threads marked solved open until no further posts received for a month.

For the small number of instances when the above does not work ... a solution vs optimum solution maybe a matter of opinion, probably not many instances where the solution will not work/is dangerous - if it is then moderators or trusted penguins should be able to update.

If someone feels really strongly a thread should be re-opened then start a new thread and link to the original. Moderators and trusted penguins can probably reopen the thread and move posts if it seems like the right thing to do.

[Rubberman]

Yeah. I've often wanted to post a question as to how a problem was solved when a thread was closed before I got to it. I vote for the "wait 30 days after being flagged as 'solved' before closing the thread".

[elija]

Yeah. I've often wanted to post a question as to how a problem was solved when a thread was closed before I got to it. I vote for the "wait 30 days after being flagged as 'solved' before closing the thread".

Thirded! But I would say wait a week!