Automatic closing of older threads

[Paul Stenning]

I have just installed a plug-in to automatically close threads after 90 days of inactivity. This is based on the last post date.

This should avoid really old threads being revived. Most of the time when this happens it would actually have been better and less confusing to start a new thread, and we often had to split these threads.

If you have a similar problem to that discussed in a closed thread, please start a new thread and include a link to the old thread for reference.

Of course if anyone wants an older thread reopened so that they can add something to the discussion (perhaps because you are returning to a repair after a long break or there is an update to a member news thread), then just ask one of the moderators and we will do so for you.

Note that the automatic closing process runs at around 1am so if you ask for a thread to be reopened please post in it the same day otherwise it will get closed again.

[broadgage]

My view is that 90 days is too short and that about twice that time or even longer might be better.

There are some threads that refer to a TYPE of equipment or technology, rather than say the repair of a particular set.
Such threads contain a wealth of information and in my view should be left open either indefinitely or for a lot longer than 90 days.

An example would be the long running thread on vintage Christmas lights, I think that may have gone 90 days without comment, but IMHO should be left open for any new enquiries or comments, thereby keeping all vintage Christmas lighting in one thread.

Another example would be the thread on obsolete fluorescent light fittings, worth keeping open IMHO for new enquiries rather than lots of threads on the same subject.

Neither of the above threads is about a particular repair or restoration that when completed could reasonably have the thread closed.

[Paul Stenning]

Like all changes this was discussed in the mods area and we all agreed on the usefulness and period.

The 90 days is from the date of the last post, not the thread start date. So any thread that is moderately active and gets at least one post every three months will remain open.

There will always be exceptions, but for the majority of threads we feel that 90 days of inactivity is ample. Even general interest threads like the fluorescent lights one would be likely to get new posts within that timescale - if they actually are of ongoing interest and there is anything left to say.

Seasonal threads like the Christmas Lights one which may well become dormant after the event can easily be reopened on request as we approach the next Christmas season. These are very much an exception though.

The majority of threads are about a specific issue or general restoration of a specific piece of equipment and tend to either reach a conclusion or fizzle out. Having these quietly close after 90 days of inactivity won't affect anyone, and will prevent them being reopened with a different enquiry (or pointless comment) months or years later. If the thread starter wishes to continue it after a long break we can reopen it on request.

In the past the mods would periodically trawl through sections closing all the older threads and it never caused any issues. However it is a tedious and time-consuming job, and a perfect candidate for automating.

[Dave Moll]

If it frees up moderators' time for tasks that actually need intelligent oversight, I'm all in favour of automating such routine tasks.

As stated, anything "incorrectly" caught by this can be sorted in the way described.

[paulsherwin]

Let's see how it beds in. We can always reconsider if it causes problems.

[AC/HL]

At the risk of stating the obvious, the easiest way to contact the Moderators (for this or any other reason) is the red triangle on the left of any post.