0

Because 1% of the posts that resurrect an old thread might actually have some useful information -- not for the OP but for someone just dropping in.

80% cause problems by
1) Hijacking the post
2) Posting bad code requiring people to correct it
3) Posting wrong code requiring people to besmirch/correct it
4) Uselessly reiterating what was said before
5) Stating an option that is not usable
6) Starting arguments
7) Infracting new members

The other 19% are worthless and sometimes are just ignored, except by those that have to point out the resurrector is a dummy.

0

If someone posts spam to an old thread it is dealt with as spam in the usual way.

If someone hijacks an old thread then that posting is split and moved in the usual way.

If someone adds something new to an old thread then that's fine.

As it stands at the moment there is a new feature freeze on DaniWeb anyway while Dani prepares a site update, but even allowing for that I can see no compelling reason to change the way things are handled already.

0

As it stands at the moment there is a new feature freeze on DaniWeb anyway while Dani prepares a site update, but even allowing for that I can see no compelling reason to change the way things are handled already.

I thought the obvious reason was to make the moderators job a lot easier.

0

How does it make the mods job easier to have threads closed after a given time limit?

If someone wants to post spam they will do it as a new message instead, and it still needs dealing with.

If someone cannot post a hijack to a closed thread they will find an open one instead, and it still needs dealing with.

If someone is intent on flaming/trolling/being offensive whatever, they will do it anyway and it still needs dealing with.

0

IMO having the threads closed after a given time will force the average user to do one of three things:
1 - Become a member then post their first topic
2 - See there is no reply function and bump a 10 year old topic on another site
3 - Become a member and pm for help

Now I know it may seem like not much of an alternative for the average user but it is much better than what the moderators have to put up with now. Also if they were to hijack threads while the tread auto close was in place there is no way they could hijack anything that shouldn't be hijacked. Maybe even make it so that threads with a certain age that get bumped need to be approved by moderators and let there be a popup message saying "are you sure you want this topic to go into the moderation que as it is over 4 months old". I don't know about you but it doesn't look too nice when there are 3 or even 5 year old topics being bumped and sometimes ignored or like most times abused and separated.

How does it make the mods job easier to have threads closed after a given time limit?

If someone wants to post spam they will do it as a new message instead, and it still needs dealing with.

If someone cannot post a hijack to a closed thread they will find an open one instead, and it still needs dealing with.

If someone is intent on flaming/trolling/being offensive whatever, they will do it anyway and it still needs dealing with.

1

Mod queues always sound a good idea, unless you are one of the mods who actually have to police the things. Speaking from experience, I can say that they create much more work than they save. They also penalise decent members who are looking for a quick answer to an urgent problem but find that the question does not even get published for 24 or 48 hours because a mod has to work through the queue to reach it, along with dealing with other mod duties. So such a solution would, in my opinion, work against us in creating more work for mods and driving members to other forums.

0

A moderation que was only one of many ideas as previously posted. Like what happened to that idea where if a user is replying to a topic older than 4 months a new topic is automatically created. If you wanted to keep the new content that would probably be your best solution.

0

Mod queues always sound a good idea, unless you are one of the mods who actually have to police the things. Speaking from experience, I can say that they create much more work than they save. They also penalise decent members who are looking for a quick answer to an urgent problem but find that the question does not even get published for 24 or 48 hours because a mod has to work through the queue to reach it, along with dealing with other mod duties. So such a solution would, in my opinion, work against us in creating more work for mods and driving members to other forums.

Agreed, it is a bad idea. But working through the queue wouldn't be an issue; having a mod online at all times would be the problem.

0

No, the problem would be of having a relevant mod online all the time [C++ mod passing judgment over a Internet marketing forum thread might lead to disaster, been there, done that :)].

Pure spam posts/threads are pretty easy to handle but when it comes to threads/posts which *seem* as though they are violating a rule, it is the OP who suffers since the entire thing goes into a discussion and the thread doesn't make its way to the forum intended. If it breaks the rules, fine, but if it doesn't, it is the member who loses out on getting help which leaves a pretty bad impression.

0

How is a mod queue any less work (for a mod)?
- if it's spam, it's work for me (to report), and work for mods (to delete)
- if it's off-topic, it's work for me (to report), and work for mods (to move)
- if it's lacking code tags, it's work for me (to report), and work for mods (to edit)
IMO, that covers well over 95% of the dribble on the end of dead threads.

Having ALL posts on dead threads go into a mod queue is 5% extra work for mods, and 95% LESS extra work for me.

All that extra time could be spent actually answering questions.

If the mods disagree, then start giving me infractions for flagrant use of the report post feature, then I'll stop.

0

If the mods disagree, then start giving me infractions for flagrant use of the report post feature, then I'll stop.

Ofcourse not. I personally am very happy with you reporting all those posts, because I simply do not have the time to read all the posts on DW, and it's nice to know that there are members who are putting in a lot of effort to make the overall quality of DW better. To be honest, I hope more people start reporting posts because of this thread. I would be very grateful :)

0

Indeed. If there is ONE thing that makes life easier for mods it is using the flag post feature to report spam etc.

0

Did anyone read this post?

A moderation que was only one of many ideas as previously posted. Like what happened to that idea where if a user is replying to a topic older than 4 months a new topic is automatically created. If you wanted to keep the new content that would probably be your best solution.

1

Indeed. If there is ONE thing that makes life easier for mods it is using the flag post feature to report spam etc.

Problem is spammers post faster than I can report them, given the minimum time required between posts.

0

- if it's lacking code tags, it's work for me (to report), and work for mods (to edit)

This one IMO you can stop reporting. We'll find non-tagged code, at least in the heavily trafficked forums.. I always have to backtrack and find I've already dealt with the tags.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.