I've actually noticed this, both here and on many other boards. Rules, either explicit or implicit, suggest that necroposting is discouraged or forbidden. But let's not kid ourselves, a majority of members have probably never read the board rules.
However phpBB doesn't provide core functionality for admins to close older topics. It can be done via an extension such as Auto-lock Topics.
It would be useful to many boards to have this functionality in phpBB's core.
Normal people… believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t have enough features yet. – Scott Adams
The problem is here on this very board, everyone is told to... search first,
So we direct them to old topics and then if they post a reply on that topic they get told off.
On my own board I allow the members to reply to old topics, if they have something to say related to that topic then it doesn't matter if it was x years ago, why start another thread about the same subject when it can all be under one roof as it were called.
Most of us will enjoy Christmas in the comfort of our own homes this year, however, sadly, that can't be said for people in the Ukraine who are suffering day after day, due to the Russian invasion.
If you would like to make a small donation to help Ukrainians in their time of need, you can donate to help all Ukrainians via BritishRedCross or you can donate to help the Ukrainian children via Unicef. Thank You
The idea here is to provide the ability, not the requirement, for admins to auto-lock topics based on some criteria that applies for their specific board and membership.
The functionality is similar to using the Prune forums (or auto-pruning) functionality in ACP which "This will delete any topic which has not been posted to or viewed within the number of days you select." Some boards may use it for specific forums, or widely, or not at all. phpBB's core provides this functionality.
Having the same functionality to auto-lock in the core is an idea worth considering IMHO. Hence the topic.
Normal people… believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t have enough features yet. – Scott Adams
I don't mind that so-called necroposting. I'm not against that functionality being in the core, but if extension for it already exist & is maintained, then it doesn't fit into the core, at least not at current moment, because there are more prior things to do.
Usus est magister optimus! phpBB pre-Triton & latest php environment.
When answer lies in the question, question becomes redundant!
GTI wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:55 pm
The problem is here on this very board, everyone is told to... search first,
So we direct them to old topics and then if they post a reply on that topic they get told off.
I wouldn't necessarily call it "telling off", but more of a helpful nudge for them to open their own topic (especially when users reply to topics that are 2+ years old from the last reply). The reason we ask users to search is so they can try any suggestions or resolutions that may have helped other users in the past.
I welcome any suggestions you may have that might improve the perception of us "telling off" users. Please feel free to PM me if you have any questions, concerns or comments.
P_I wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 4:09 pmRules, either explicit or implicit, suggest that necroposting is discouraged or forbidden. But let's not kid ourselves, a majority of members have probably never read the board rules.
You mean the community rules which not even remotely mention a topic age? Also a more verbose version of the rules from the past does nowhere mention such a thing. Unless I miss a different place with rules the unwanted necroposting is a personal rule, not an official one.
One major downside of making necroposting a problem is: discussed issues are then bound to time - if it's something which endures years then everyone replying to a rather old topic will make those moderators who are convinced such a rule exists lock the topic.
"The problem is probably not my English but you do not want to understand correctly. ... We will not come anybody anyway, nevertheless, it's best to shit this." Affin, 2018-11-20 ↑
"But this shit is not here for you. You can follow with your. Maybe the question, instead, was for you, who know, so you shoved us how you are." axe70, 2020-10-10 ↑
"My reaction is not to everyone, especially to you." Raptiye, 2021-02-28 ↑
Kailey wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 8:10 pmThe reason we ask users to search is so they can try any suggestions or resolutions that may have helped other users in the past
And, many users that come here are very inexperienced with all things computer. Suggesting they search first is a learning curve for many that, hopefully, after a successful search gives them confidence to use search again, not just here but everywhere search is available. I would go with the auto lock suggestion though, in two or three years so many things change certain subjects are an irrelevance and distraction.
"The good news is hell is just the product of a morbid human imagination.
The bad news is, whatever humans can imagine, they can usually create." - Harmony Cobel
Mick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:24 am
..., in two or three years so many things change certain subjects are an irrelevance and distraction.
Agreed
Mick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:24 amI would go with the auto lock suggestion though
On this I have to disagree:
Autolocking implies an automatic trigger and I just can't think of any criterium that could be considered programmatically foolproof (not even time-based) for support topics.
Basically I'm in favour of manual locking based on (knowledgeable) humans evaluating whether all has been said and nothing new could be added.
Spelling is freeware, which means you can use it for free.
On the other hand, it is not open source, which means you cannot change it or publish it in a modified form.
Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana.
warmweer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:23 am
Autolocking implies an automatic trigger and I just can't think of any criterium that could be considered programmatically foolproof (not even time-based) for support topics.
You are right there is no "foolproof" way of doing this but if, for example, a support topic is a year old then it is reasonable to assume that either it has been fixed or it is irrelevant because a later version has been released. In any event I would say that starting a new topic, with perhaps a reference back to the "old" topic would be acceptable
In my board, it is very helpful and relevant for the members to post updates of a specific situation. It is important that members see the entire discussion from start.
Linking to an older discussion is not helpful because members may not follow those links. Important points from those earlier discussions will be lost.
I'm not going to vote either way, but I don't think necroposting is inherently bad, unless it is a topic that just didn't age well.
For example, it would be pointless to resurrect a topic pertaining to who would win the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election for example (there's nothing left to really discuss in such topics), but something more general, like a general topic discussing how social media is impacting society, would be something that is more timeless.
I think this is something that is best left to human judgement.
I changed my mind. I can now see autolocking as just as useful as autopruning.
Avatar by someone named AdmiralRA on Reddit. (No, I don't have a Reddit account)
When seeking support, please consider filling out the Support Request Template. It makes it easier for anyone trying to help.