Not a lot of people are fans of “necroposting” (if memory serves right, it means to post on a thread after being inactive for a long while). Worst yet, it’s probably less likely you’ll gain any responses from the same people that have posted in a thread long ago or from anyone really. I think if the time limit is not too long and not too short (so as to cover both bases) like say… 3 to 7 months till the post becomes archived, then it’d be acceptable. However, it’d be cool if instance maintainers get to control that feature since I’m sure they won’t be all agreeing on the same limit.
Is there a time limit the lemmy devs/admins have agreed on so far?
Imagine a problem with kernel Linux 5.10 right now.
I am using the oldest LTS version always and, in 2 years, I finish in version 5.10.
I didn’t read the post of that version in that time because I didn’t need it, but now I need it and happens that anyone replied a workaround that works for me and want to ask again.
Why should I open another thread and expect people to unread that one (even if I reference it in the new thread most people will ignore) and post likely the same unsuccessful replies now?
Could happen the same with a discussion around a topic, people recycling arguments already discussed again and the situation goes to a no point.
The person commenting an old thread should be aware of that, so I don’t see what forbidding them to comment helps with.
See, the thing is, not everyone keeps that in mind before posting in an old thread. I’ve also made the assumption that the user expects a response from the og posters and/or OP, which might not necessarily be true.
I do understand that, but forbidding everyone to answer the thread seems like a radical solution for this mild problem. Maybe a more appropriate solution would be highlighting the age of the post and of the last comment.
So far there is nothing like this implemented, thats why i’m asking. And yes the (default) time to close threads automatically is also an important question.
Not a lot of people are fans of “necroposting” (if memory serves right, it means to post on a thread after being inactive for a long while). Worst yet, it’s probably less likely you’ll gain any responses from the same people that have posted in a thread long ago or from anyone really. I think if the time limit is not too long and not too short (so as to cover both bases) like say… 3 to 7 months till the post becomes archived, then it’d be acceptable. However, it’d be cool if instance maintainers get to control that feature since I’m sure they won’t be all agreeing on the same limit.
Is there a time limit the lemmy devs/admins have agreed on so far?
I am not sure:
Imagine a problem with kernel Linux 5.10 right now.
I am using the oldest LTS version always and, in 2 years, I finish in version 5.10.
I didn’t read the post of that version in that time because I didn’t need it, but now I need it and happens that anyone replied a workaround that works for me and want to ask again.
Why should I open another thread and expect people to unread that one (even if I reference it in the new thread most people will ignore) and post likely the same unsuccessful replies now?
Could happen the same with a discussion around a topic, people recycling arguments already discussed again and the situation goes to a no point.
Edited:
Could this be set depending on the community?
The person commenting an old thread should be aware of that, so I don’t see what forbidding them to comment helps with.
It also depends how a newly commented post is highlighted in usrrs’ feed.
See, the thing is, not everyone keeps that in mind before posting in an old thread. I’ve also made the assumption that the user expects a response from the og posters and/or OP, which might not necessarily be true.
I do understand that, but forbidding everyone to answer the thread seems like a radical solution for this mild problem. Maybe a more appropriate solution would be highlighting the age of the post and of the last comment.
So far there is nothing like this implemented, thats why i’m asking. And yes the (default) time to close threads automatically is also an important question.