• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can     REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.

Automatically close threads inactive for 3 months

DeletedUser113110

Proposal:
To close threads that have been inactive for 3 months.
Is there any ideas similar to yours?
Not any I could see.
Details:
Recently, many players have been answering to threads that are 'dead', and threads that had its last post in 2014/15. That is why I am proposing to close threads automatically that have not been active for 3 months. Basically, a thread automatically closes(but NOT deletes) if it was inactive for 3 months. This will avoid the clutter of old threads weighing down new ones.
Visual Aids
No visuals for now.
Balance:
Just a new small change. It won't even take too much of the devs time.
Abuse Preventation:
No abuse possible.
 
Agent327

Agent327

Overlord
On similar proposals the answer was that they do not own the software and that they are not going to make changes to it. On some more up to date forums, changes of the forum are on the do not suggest list, but feel free to pursue this.
 
Sp32

Sp32

Master Corporal
>They can not make changes to it.
Then becomes:
>they are not going to make changes to it

Nice save there bro. But for reference sake, please can you link to the thread where they are suggesting they won't implement anything regarding the forum software? As I'd hate to suggest an implementation of a mod if they point blank don't do that.

I would assume this mod would take less than 10 minutes to implement and the only reason I could see it not being implemented is down to admins availability as I am guessing the moderators don't have access to the forums via ftp/server control panels etc.

But yeah I agree, we should pursue this as there are a lot of inactive dead threads from a long time ago (Sometimes over a year) and it's just pointless keeping them alive as people will read them thinking it could be current news etc. I feel like if no one has replied within a month or two then the thread should be locked. At least then if someone has the same problem they can create a new thread and get support regarding their direct issues as opposed to someone who has had a similar issue in a time where different things were available.

Just my 2 cents..
 
Last edited:
Agent327

Agent327

Overlord
Sp32 said:
But yeah I agree, we should pursue this as there are a lot of inactive dead threads from a long time ago (Sometimes over a year) and it's just pointless keeping them alive as people will read them thinking it could be current news etc. I feel like if no one has replied within a month or two then the thread should be locked. At least then if someone has the same problem they can create a new thread and get support regarding their direct issues as opposed to someone who has had a similar issue in a time where different things were available.
Click to expand...

Threads can't be locked after a period of 2 or 3 months. In this ideas section you have to look if someone hasn't suggested the same before and if so, you are not supposed to start a new thread, but ofcourse you knew that.

Threads shouldnt be locked. Forum parts should be.
 
Emberguard

Emberguard

Legend
We won't be closing any idea threads unless there's a reason for it or the OP requests it. Creating duplicate idea threads of the same idea just increases the work required to track community responses when deciding which ideas to pass on. Aside from which they'd first have to find the idea to bump it. Which if they've found it would probably indicate they were going to suggest that idea anyway


Threads in other areas of the forum only need locking if the question is outdated, derailed beyond repair, is a rule breach, requested by OP or isn't open to replies (mod announcement).

There's nothing really wrong with a player bumping a old thread in other parts of the forum if they have something to bring to the subject.
 
Agent327

Agent327

Overlord
Emberguard said:
There's nothing really wrong with a player bumping a old thread in other parts of the forum if they have something to bring to the subject.
Click to expand...

Really????

What exactly would be so important that players still have to reply in forum parts like "Forward", "Implemented" and "Ideas Archive"?

Or in the bugs section "Confirmed Issues", "Fixed Issues" and "Bugs Archive"?

Looking forward to your answer.
 
Sp32

Sp32

Master Corporal
Agent327 said:
There is a reason to close the ones mentioned.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I don't think you read Emberguards post correctly, reread again and it should be obvious why not.

If someone bumps an old thread about a new implementation it saves creating a new thread and it counts towards a +1 vote of that old thread.

Logical I think... Never know when something might become relevant after being irrelevant.. Balances etc. I understand it is common practice to auto close threads in most general common forums but this seems like a thought out structure on how to address potential situations arising without having repeat threads.
 
ntnete0

ntnete0

Brigadier-General
Yes, it could be done. Threads that don't have any narative should be cloesd and some things like ides could even if old come to a new light and possibly find new audience that actually like that old idea ... meaning old idea that is in general idea section... while even forwarded idea and comenting on it gives a sort of compliment to the writer that it still someone is reading it ...
 

DeletedUser113110

Sp32 said:
I disagree, I don't think you read Emberguards post correctly, reread again and it should be obvious why not.

If someone bumps an old thread about a new implementation it saves creating a new thread and it counts towards a +1 vote of that old thread.

Logical I think... Never know when something might become relevant after being irrelevant.. Balances etc. I understand it is common practice to auto close threads in most general common forums but this seems like a thought out structure on how to address potential situations arising without having repeat threads.
Click to expand...
However, threads in Implemented/Forwarded should be locked. Agree?
 
Sp32

Sp32

Master Corporal
King Jared The III said:
However, threads in Implemented/Forwarded should be locked. Agree?
Click to expand...

Not sure at first I thought yes but then if something big is implemented then maybe something wasnt right and needed to be posted about but then I guess its posted in bugs section.

This forum is managed differently to the type I am used to so the ones I am from normally close and complain if old thread is bumped but staff here said thats okay.. So I guess I'll just bump old threads instead of creating a new one from now on.. Hopefully thats okay :-)
 

DeletedUser113235

King Jared The III said:
Proposal:
To close threads that have been inactive for 3 months.
Is there any ideas similar to yours?
Not any I could see.
Details:
Recently, many players have been answering to threads that are 'dead', and threads that had its last post in 2014/15. That is why I am proposing to close threads automatically that have not been active for 3 months. Basically, a thread automatically closes(but NOT deletes) if it was inactive for 3 months. This will avoid the clutter of old threads weighing down new ones.
Visual Aids
No visuals for now.
Balance:
Just a new small change. It won't even take too much of the devs time.
Abuse Preventation:
No abuse possible.
Click to expand...

-1
Cause why?

This only will increase the number of duplicated threads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top