Star Trek

Didn't the Admin just put out a policy that any thread that hasn't been updated for x days automatically gets locked?

I'm trying to find it now...

Found a mention of it the auto-lock coming in the PM Function thread -

http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33345041/a-pm-function?page=17

No clue - I wouldn't have - except maybe something at least a year old.  Too often a subject we start goes back burner and then comes back.  I hate starting a new thread for it, but oh well.

Part of the problem is,
when this site changed over,
there was an outcry from a
very vocal group, that ALL
threads from the old site be
transfered here. The people
who were bellyaching about
that have moved on, mostly.
And just about every topic
has been duplicated on this
site, anyway. So there's alot
of brush. But nobody asked me ...

The only thing I can think of for locking a thread is to help with the search engine's index - it wouldn't have to keep crawling locked threads.

This site does not like repeat threads,
but that's ALL it's got. For example ...

-Thread 1: Kirk's Womanizing
-Thread 2: How Many Women Has Kirk Used?
-Thread 3: Did Kirk Ever Love Those Women?
- Poll 1: Does Kirk Use Women?
- Poll 2: Is Kirk a Womanizer?

Etc., over and over again. Nobody looks for,
or cares about, other threads on the topic.
They just keep turning them out and regurgitating
the same rhetoric about it unabated and ad nausium.

So it made - and makes - NO DIFFERENCE in keeping
ANY of the threads from the past site. Therefor, yes, it's
bellyaching, because of EGO only - wanting to see their
comments still available and they ditched the site, anyway.

But startrrek.com yeilded, which caused glitches galore,
which continue to persist, when they could have started
clean and it wouldn't have changed any of the board's content.
Even now, topics repeat themselves exactly in the same week.

  that is the problem with taking suggestions from members.  They aren't always going to agree

  that is the problem with taking suggestions from members.  They aren't always going to agree

Yanks, I think most of it is simply because a few members have, to borrow a term already used in this thread, 'bellyached' and were rather vocal about old/older threads being brought back up to the first page.  Even though at least one of those that 'bellyached' has themselves brought up topics/threads that are years old just to make it seem like they are being picked on now.

Myself, I think that that is the real problem.  I've taken to looking at the date at the top of the original post or at least the first post.  Those that drege up a thread/post from say, 2004 or 2006, and then whine that they are being picked on as if it just happened today.  Those are the ones that are the real problem, IMHO.

Someone actually taking the time to look to see if there is already a topic/thread before starting a new thread just like it is not a problem to me.  In fact it is also in the TOU/TOS in that we are supposed to do just that to cut down on duplicate threads/topics.

As for locking threads......some do require locking.  In that case locking a thread should occur when the same arguments end up in a stalemate.  In that case, lock the thread.  Now in the case of those threads that are locked and the OP has been nuked/banned, if it is a thread that attacks member(s) &/or Admin, then instead of locking it and leaving it in the forum it was started in, maybe Admin, if they want to keep it for some kind of reference, could move it to an 'Archive' forum.  One that is viewable only.  That would clear up the original forum yet keep the locked threads for reference if needed.

And before I get flamed about keeping threads for referenace, I don't mean those filler threads/topics.  I mean the threads and topics that have good discussions or are reviews of the series/movies.  And make an 'Archive' forum read only.  I did it on my old board and I have that on my renewed 'old' board.

Anyway, that is my POV on locked threads.  And my answer to Yanks as to why some threads are/have been locked.  ^_^

Peace!

*Edited to fix a couple of spelling errors*

I liked the old site!

To clarify, there was a member, since banned more than once, that would complain about other members bringing topics from, say, page 10 and about a month or two old, up to page one yet that member had no problem bringing old topics that were up to 4 or more years past and treating them as if they were only a day or two old.

Not an accusation, but just stating a fact as I and others had seen and experienced back on the old ST.com boards.  I will apologize if any truly new members might hae thought I meant them.  I was speaking about a past banned member and their actions.

Peace!

One question I have regarding locked threads are the ones that have absolutely no posts in them whatsoever.

Like this one: http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33346188/nice-tasty-treats-with-a-twist

And this one: http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33345827/who-s-still-here-from-the-old-community

This: http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33345084/this-site-is-all-tweens

And this one: http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33345082/what

Those are all from the last three pages in the Ten Forawrd Forum, pages 399, 400 and 401

So why are those threads even still around?  They're locked and have zero posts.  I could see setting a post limit, say of 100 or 150 where a thread will be locked with a follow-up thread allowed if there is still intrest in the topic, but why keep empty threads around??  Those ones are really only taking up space and cannot even be used for research or reference.  Just sayin'

Okie, took me awhile and 44 pages later I found:

Locked threads with -1 posts/replies: 342

Locked threads showing 0 posts/replies: 321

Why keep those threads?  They're locked and have zero replies.  Taking up space IMHO