However, given that this seems to be so unpopular, I have a different proposal –
I am planning to perform a one time sweep of the community category to start a 30 day timer on all of those threads, so if there are no posts within a month of that timer being set, they’ll be locked. This will not apply to new threads, at least for the time being. After that month, I’ll wait a little longer to see how much demand there really ends up being on old threads, and then revisit this overall policy.
I’ll also take suggestions on particular threads to exempt from this (The Under and the glitches thread, for example), but no promises.
I don’t know if either of these would be possible but:
When bumping a thread that hasn’t been posted on in over 3 months, instead of appearing at the top of most recent posts, have it appear near the bottom of the page. (If someone responds to it afterwards, that response would be less than 3 months, so it would bump to the top.)
When posting on threads with no response within the last year, it doesn’t bump the thread. That way people could easily add responses to historic threads if they really wanted to, but it wouldn’t really affect the general users.
Just some ideas. Might not even be possible, though.
Just add a line in the rules that says you shouldn’t post in [category] threads after [number] days unless you’re the OP. This has been a common feature in almost every forum on the internet for the past 30 years, so I don’t imagine it’d be difficult to enforce here in this smaller community.
Doesn’t make you re-invent the wheel with fancy Discourse coding.
Doesn’t make OPs have to go through needless hoops to post in their own threads.
Doesn’t fill your forum with locked threads.
Gives mods a “legal” justification for removing these necros, something they clearly didn’t have up until now.
right, after talking with the staff for a bit after the frankly astonishing unpopularity of this change, we’ll be shelving this policy for the time being. there was, in fact, a line in our FAQ saying not to make pointless posts (even before recent edits, which you are welcome to look up for yourself), but hopefully the current wording will make it more clear.
that said, i am reserving the right of the staff to manually activate thread timers on specific threads without notice in extreme cases.
Don’t post no-content replies. We reserve the right to delete and lock threads if pointless bumping becomes a problem.
I definitely approve of shelving the auto-lock policy, but I’d suggest going for clearer wording regarding what’s actually allowed. This doesn’t tell much about what constitutes “pointless bumping”.
Based on this OP, apparently the mod team considers “7 days” to be the limit in Community, and 30 days elsewhere. “Projects”, “Creative” and “Drafts” are seemingly all exempt from the auto-lock, so are necro-posts fine there?
If people aren’t sure what’s cool and what isn’t, the bumping you wanted to stop will… probably continue.
If you don’t wanna clutter the rules with specifics, just link to this thread. You can probably recycle the OP (or make a new post) to explain what is actually permitted.
It’s pretty simply, really. People want the pointless bumping to end. At the same time, going from level 1 to level 99 in one stop gap jump is just absurd. The solution is to go to level ten and bump it up or down from there gradually.
Just make this the official rule. “If a thread is more than 4 weeks old, don’t bump it if you’re not adding anything to the discussion. Memes and requests for more content do not add to the discussion.”
Just to add on -
“Please PM the creator of the thread if you must ask them whether their project is still alive or not many months after their last update.”
Dunno if we really want to be that specific with the rules. But I have seen a number of posts like this.
Only confusing part left is that the 4 weeks thing doesn’t apply to projects in the first place. I am not personally bothered whether the exact number of weeks is specified in the rules or not.
how is asking the thread creators if their projects alive too specific? It take only a minute to fire of a message to them saying that your going to lock the thread temporarily until you get a response confirming or denying the project’s current status, it’s not that complicated. You could even have a basic template you could use for those messages and just swap out a couple variables if required.
I could understand if this would apply to every thread but I certainly think for threads for ROMhacks it is a pretty easy rule that makes life easier for everyone involved since then the thread creators have an immediate contact route and are aware of the thread being locked, not everyone checks the thread every day.
Sorry, I specifically meant when someone necrobumps a project thread simply asking “lol it has been 2 years since the last post, is this project still alive?” which I personally find annoying, so I wouldn’t mind a rule against that specifically, but I’m not that fussed about it either way.
I actually have a pet peeve with the way old and inactive threads work. Let me explain.
First, I’ll pretend I’m talking about one of my threads. For me, any sort of criticism of a past project, or any feedback about it, any insights gained from playing it, and even something like, “Wow, I really enjoyed this project! The gameplay was fun even if I didn’t enjoy the dialogue!” or whatever; those are all useful posts. Those are good reasons to have my thread open. Truthfully, some people could achieve the same ends by PMing me, but that’s one small layer of friction I don’t like having.
My peeve, however, comes from a decision that most forums, including Serenes and FEU, often or sometimes make. Sometimes one person will make a post after like 6 months in an inactive topic, and their post is worthless. Just “is the proyect ded?” tier posts. Right, so that sucks. But then usually the entire post gets locked, thus preventing other people from leaving valuable feedback!
“Don’t bump old threads with nonsense. Locked.”
I mean, I see it on Serenes more than here, by a wiiiiide margin, but I think it’s worth pointing out. Now the thread, since it’s locked, has zero chance to accumulate valuable feedback, and that’s a shame.
Edit: There were a couple of pretty rude posts above this that were flagged and then removed.
I’ve seen a couple of posts that were basically just an outcry of dissatisfaction with the staff. Here’s my opinion, for whatever that’s worth.
“Mods didn’t resolve this thread fast enough”
There was public backlash and in response to that, they said “wait, hold on” and brought revised policies to the table a couple of weeks later. These new policies seem to have been well-received.
“Mods have personal vendettas against me or a specific user”
Mods are people too. They don’t have to like you or agree with you. I admit that I’ve seen the rare comment from a mod that was a thinly veiled insult directed at somebody. It would be a nicer world if these comments didn’t happen, but I see no abuse of power. Any post I’ve seen that was later deleted (eg. one on this thread) or flagged were posts that were no where near respectful, legitimate feedback.
“I don’t like the mods”
That’s fine. We aren’t expected to like everybody. But we are expected to at least tolerate each other. Rude behaviour towards anybody, mod or not, is uncalled for and I feel those sort of posts should generally be removed.
Sorry for the rant & if this sort of post is out of place.
This felt rather unnecessary. I suppose I appreciate the, erm, support? I certainly don’t think the vast majority of FEU’s staff are terrible at their jobs or anything. A bit of bias is also always expected.
Yup. I’m just glad to see the policy revised.
I was hoping it would happen, and it did. That’s good moderation in my opinion. Now I’m only quibbling over the specifics.