| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 53202 | 2005-01-10 08:29:00 | Old Threads | Prescott (11) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 312746 | 2005-01-10 08:29:00 | hey there, im not sure if you guys are noticing but more and more new users are replying to threads that are like 2-3 years old, thanks to the google bots i think, i think it is a waste of time dragging threads that old, and i would be a shame if the old threads were deleted because they very useful sometimes, so i have an idea, why dont we lock the threads the are 2 years old? | Prescott (11) | ||
| 312747 | 2005-01-10 08:43:00 | hey there, im not sure if you guys are noticing but more and more new users are replying to threads that are like 2-3 years old, thanks to the google bots i think, i think it is a waste of time dragging threads that old, and i would be a shame if the old threads were deleted because they very useful sometimes, so i have an idea, why dont we lock the threads the are 2 years old? We as PressF1 users have the ability via the CP to not even show older threads. The google bots like most other bots just trundle around the Internet and show old threads like on PressF1. Some people have really old systems and may get answers from older threads on PressF1. Why do you not use the CP and not even see threads more than X weeks old? JMHO! Bye. |
Elephant (599) | ||
| 312748 | 2005-01-10 08:46:00 | but its being bumped up in the new posts section | Prescott (11) | ||
| 312749 | 2005-01-10 09:08:00 | Many of the more active forums delete threads more than between 3-6 months old. I guess that because this is a help forum it would pay to keep the older threads as not every has new gear but locking threads could be an idea if the software allows it easily. I believe about 3 months is appropriate for an active thread, as there is nothing to stop people asking the question again. The best course is to inform newbies(this maybe their first forum) that replying to 2 year old threads is both pointless and can be annoying.(doing it in the nicest possible way :D ) |
Raikyn (6293) | ||
| 312750 | 2005-01-10 09:08:00 | Old threads are being replied to because when someone searches the archived forums they find something interesting and then reply to it without noticing the date. Unfortunately this forum doesn't have the old post alert which the Jive forum did (this could be looked into again). They just need a very polite friendly comment about the date factor if necessary, otherwise the thread can be left to just drop down the board again. |
Jen (38) | ||
| 312751 | 2005-01-10 09:11:00 | it sometimes funny when u dont know that tey are old , and you wonder why they are writing about old stuff and then someone says and well yeah | noone (22) | ||
| 312752 | 2005-01-10 09:18:00 | thanks to the google bots i think More likely because the search doesn't suck anymore. |
[/quote] (6591) | ||
| 312753 | 2005-01-10 09:28:00 | but its being bumped up in the new posts sectionAnything can be bumped anytime. Hopefully the first post may get a timely and accurate answer. This is not always the case as we know. You could try ignoring posts to old threads or actually read the date. |
Elephant (599) | ||
| 312754 | 2005-01-10 19:59:00 | I can't see anything wrong with adding to old threads - many of them are relevant even after a couple of years. | Greg (193) | ||
| 312755 | 2005-01-10 20:19:00 | I can't see anything wrong with adding to old threads - many of them are relevant even after a couple of years. even a thread that is from 1998 and they are askin a question about a 486? ;) |
Prescott (11) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||