this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2021
26 points (96.4% liked)

Asklemmy

44631 readers
808 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago (3 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago (1 children)

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.

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago

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.