Solved thread closing

Just a few examples:

http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/deb...p-timeout.html

http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/new...rid-linux.html

http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/ins...ard-drive.html

Is there any particular reason for closing solved threads? If someone wants to come back a week later and add some new information, the thread being solved would make that difficult and cumbersome enough that they may decide not to bother...

Does closing the solved threads provide any benefits vs not closing them?

I believe it is up to the member who started the thread if they wish to mark it solved. It is the forum software that closes them when this happens. I think anyway as I'm not specifically familiar with vbulletin.

Well that clears it up thanks. I tested marking this thread as solved and it closed the thread...

I'm sure this behaviour is non-standard - i.e. marking a thread as solved should not usually close the thread. It may depend on the hack (as far as I am aware the solved thread thing is usually a hack) installed here, or there may be some settings to change this.

I would suggest changing this behaviour to not close the thread by default to allow for the adding of updated information.

Hi caravel.
Thanks for submitting your feedback.....I'm just letting you know that this topic/thread is under discussion in the Admin section. It isn't the first time we've had this same exact discussion and the general consensus last time was that we wanted the threads locked after being marked solved. It has been our own experience on this forum that it works better this way.

We'll be sure to update you here if there is any change or resolution.


In my own opinion:

We also understand the want to add updated info to a solved thread but what about threads for say, Redhat 5.1.....way out of date and unsupported? Should we allow "thread updating" from 5-10 years ago?
Also, a lot of spam that we get is just tacked onto an old unlocked thread. Some spammers/bots just don't seem to like creating new threads. Locking old threads helps keep spam at bay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeTbob

We'll be sure to update you here if there is any change or resolution.

---

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeTbob

In my own opinion:

We also understand the want to add updated info to a solved thread but what about threads for say, Redhat 5.1.....way out of date and unsupported? Should we allow "thread updating" from 5-10 years ago?
Also, a lot of spam that we get is just tacked onto an old unlocked thread. Some spammers/bots just don't seem to like creating new threads. Locking old threads helps keep spam at bay.

---

I think it's admissible that there will be threads resurrected which shouldn't have been - this can work for old unsolved threads as well. It may be that old threads contain information that is useful to someone who can find no relevant information through searching and/or making a new thread. It's useful if that person can then update the old thread with "this method still works but you need to do A and B instead of X and Y".

Sometimes you have to open up to the "risk" of idiots/spammers posting crap, to give breathing space to those wanting to post something useful.

The necro-posters may have a good reason for posting to an old solved thread and they may not - resurrecting a 5 year old thread is pushing it, but if the information is relevant I don't see the harm in it.

In terms of moderator workload, there is no difference between handling a useless/spam post in an existing thread or a new thread.

In my opinion the restrictive nature of this outweighs any perceived benefits. In terms of "housekeeping" it seems an efficient way of doing things, but in practise it doesn't really achieve anything other than closing a useful thread and forcing those wanting to update it to start a new one.

I agree with caravel and would like to add one thing he did not mention.

I discovered solved threads are locked when I wanted to post in such a thread in the Newbie section. The OP marked the thread as solved, because one of the responses given solved his or her problem. However, that solution was not the only one. Locking the thread prevented me from posting another solution that I know works.

Perhaps a compromise solution would work. Instead of immediately locking solved threads, how about locking them after a fortnight or a month? Because this forum has far less traffic than something like LQ, some threads may go several days without being read. In the example I provided above, I believe I read the locked thread the day after it was closed. And I am posting in this thread two days after the last post. And in fact, I read this thread three days after it was started. If caravel had a problem and marked the thread as solved two days ago after receiving an adequate solution, I would not be able to offer him a great solution if I had one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randicus

I discovered solved threads are locked when I wanted to post in such a thread in the Newbie section. The OP marked the thread as solved, because one of the responses given solved his or her problem. However, that solution was not the only one. Locking the thread prevented me from posting another solution that I know works.

---

Hi, Randicus.

We actually brought up that exact same detail in the admin section of the boards. It's a good point, and several folks have brought this up in the past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randicus

Perhaps a compromise solution would work. Instead of immediately locking solved threads, how about locking them after a fortnight or a month?

---

I'm not sure if that's possible, but I'll be sure to forward that suggestion forward!:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randicus

I discovered solved threads are locked when I wanted to post in such a thread in the Newbie section. The OP marked the thread as solved, because one of the responses given solved his or her problem. However, that solution was not the only one. Locking the thread prevented me from posting another solution that I know works.

---

Good point, thanks for bringing it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randicus

Perhaps a compromise solution would work. Instead of immediately locking solved threads, how about locking them after a fortnight or a month? Because this forum has far less traffic than something like LQ, some threads may go several days without being read. In the example I provided above, I believe I read the locked thread the day after it was closed. And I am posting in this thread two days after the last post. And in fact, I read this thread three days after it was started. If caravel had a problem and marked the thread as solved two days ago after receiving an adequate solution, I would not be able to offer him a great solution if I had one.

---

I have some experience as an admin of vbulletin, phpBB, ikonboard and smf forums and I've never seen a hack which automatically locks solved threads of a certain age - that's not to say there isn't one, but it's probably something that would need to be put together specifically. Theoretically it is possible but it would involve running a query periocially to check for solved threads that have not had new posts for x days and close them if they fit the criteria. It would be a lot of work - and for the reasons I've already stated, I'm not convinced it would be useful even if there were an "off the shelf" hack for this.

Personally I think it would be enough to simply not lock the solved threads. In my opinion a thread should only be locked if rules are being broken - i.e. it's turning into a flamewar/spam, etc. Locking decent threads just doesn't seem right - for all the reasons mentioned above and more.

When I see a locked thread in a forum I automatically think "what happened there...?" and open it up. I was actually caught out by this before I started this thread and then realised I'd been caught out several times before, so I decided to raise the issue here. Psychologically a locked thread just isn't good, because on most forums locked threads are a sign of problems, of flamewars, general idiocy, etc - and also of oppression from the staff (and that's definitely not the case here as far as I can tell).

Locking threads after a set period was an idea I threw out not knowing if it is feasible, but hoping for feedback if it is not. That question has been answered. Thank you.

Fighting spam is a reason with good intentions, but I doubt the efficacy. Those damn spammers will post anywhere.:mad:

My vote then (if I had one) would be to leave solved threads open.

I would also like to mention how nice it is that this discussion can take place without arguing and hurling insults. Unlike on some other boards I am familiar with, where flaming and trolling would begin after the third or forth post.:D

We do appreciate the feedback and suggestions are always welcome here. We have placed a this topic up for a vote among the forum leaders but we have only 4 of 8 votes so far.....we need more time to let the other TP's/Mods sound off in the admin section also. We'll keep you updated and thanks for the feedback and suggestions.