Warning to quotes or replies to "older than X days" posts

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18815635

Per this, does it make sense to have a warning on the submit of a reply or quoted reply where the source post is older than 365 days?

Such a warning would also have to be added when someone uses POST TO THREAD if the post just previous is old enough. But I don't see the revival of old threads as a problem in need of a solution. Nothing's wrong with adding to "Post your photos of used bus tickets" or whatever, even if the thread is 10 years old.

OhLook wrote in post #18815747
Such a warning would also have to be added when someone uses POST TO THREAD if the post just previous is old enough. But I don't see the revival of old threads as a problem in need of a solution. Nothing's wrong with adding to "Post your photos of used bus tickets" or whatever, even if the thread is 10 years old.

I would assume the POST button wouldn't have this check, just the quote or reply buttons. Usually if someone is adding to a "log style" post, they wouldn't be replying. In many other cases, though replying to some other post that is very old probably could use a warning.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18815754
I would assume the POST button wouldn't have this check, just the quote or reply buttons.

The trouble is, people may use POST even if they're addressing one person. Suppose the new post begins "Hey, NoTalentPhotog, I had the same problem, and this is what I did." Even so, the post can be annoying, but how serious is that?

OhLook wrote in post #18815764
The trouble is, people may use POST even if they're addressing one person. Suppose the new post begins "Hey, NoTalentPhotog, I had the same problem, and this is what I did." Even so, the post can be annoying, but how serious is that?

But the slight annoyance of that one person hitting a button certainly outweighs the annoyance of others and the needless posts after that, wouldn't it? I personally don't have any problems being slightly inconvenienced a few times a year because I might reply to something old than the alternative. I am sure there is an amicable solution to this, this type of issue happens quite a bit in software solutions beyond discussion boards.

Pekka has all statistical elements at his disposal to run a report to show how often a reply is made to a thread that had its last activity over X days. He could run this as a bell curve graph and find a happy median of what to set that parameter to for a one-time warning to one individual before the post actually is applied.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18815769
But the slight annoyance of that one person hitting a button certainly outweighs the annoyance of others and the needless posts after that, wouldn't it?

This question might not be answerable. How can you ever compare degrees of annoyance? When I find a new entry in a challenge that closed a week ago, I'm annoyed because some moron failed to pay attention. (An addition to the software wouldn't identify this kind of post anyway.) That annoyance is slight and momentary. If I try to add my photo of a beautiful bus ticket to the Used Bus Tickets thread, and a warning comes up telling me that the thread is old, something I already know, the annoyance is greater.

This is a classic "needs of the many vs needs of the one" problem.

Reserved (until 2029).

I understand that these days, many people seem to dislike old thread revivals, and some forums reflect this in how they operate and handle them. Looking revivals etc.

Personally, I have not changed my view from what used to be the prevailing forum etiquette that procribed;


/Deep authoritarian voice mode on;


"It is always better to post
to an EXISTING thread
than to create a NEW ONE"

http://www.albinoblack​sheep.com/flash/postin​g

I really like it when old threads are revived.

I actually think that it's sad that any thread goes dormant - I'd prefer that every thread keep on going and going and going forever. . But I do realize that there simply aren't enough active members with tons and tons to say, so there are going to be threads that go dormant for a while. . Hopefully they all get brought back at some point so that every thread on POTN eventually gets brought back up to the forefront of our attention.

I love history and I especially love the history of POTN. . I spend a good deal of time looking through and reading through pages of threads from the old days, years ago, and it saddens me that so many of those threads haven't been kept alive.

It saddens me even more that so many members have not visited the forum for years and years. . There used to be so many interesting people that posted here regularly and now they no longer post here. . I try to track them down via PM, or other means. . Every month I manage to get in touch with one or two old members, and invite them to come back and get involved again, but seldom do they have an interest in doing so. . Sad.

I still wonder what happened to Frank Hollis. . I think his user name here was HollisF. . I've tried to contact him to see what he's been up to, but I haven't gotten any responses to my PMs, and attempts to find him outside of POTN have all led to dead ends. . Maybe there are UK facebook groups that I could search in? . I don't know.

I still keep in contact regularly with a lot of former POTN members, but every now and then one just seems to disappear, and that is quite disappointing.


.

Again, in the situation that caused this thread, a person thought they were answering a member's question directly, but a) the thread was 10 years old and b) the person has been gone for 10 years.

There are several attributes available to the programming of the forum to make this work. A post knows if it is tied to other posts, it knows the user's profile and their last logged in time, etc.

1) We are not asking that the threads become locked.
2) We are not asking for any kind of prevention of posting to the thread.
3) We are only asking that a warning be presented to the user before they hit the SUBMIT button to bring things to their attention so they can decide whether they want to post.

As to Frank, send him a message on Linked In...

https://www.linkedin.c​om/in/frank-hollis-8322788b/

He is still active in the molecular biology discussions.

https://www.quora.com …ther-will-be-non-existent

.

Thanks!

Looks like you're a lot better than I am at finding people online. . Wish I had those skills.

.

I teach others on how to search the internet for things as a connection group activity from time to time here locally. Google is a large part, but you have to know keywords, and use other major sites to fill in the gaps.

Funny story, I was in a gaming forum years ago, and there was a member that posted a few things, and then tried selling something like 3 XBOXes. After a bit of searching and piecing together things, I knew his name, address, and had a class photo of him. I sent it to him and ask if that was him and where he acquired the xboxes. He wanted to know how I knew him, and then backed off on his sales on the forum. Perhaps a bit creepy, but if you know how to search, you can quickly found out how much info is out there on you, personally and for your family members.

Once you know how things piece together on what you supply as info, you learn some things on how to keep more anonymous. The best thing I can say is don't use the same screen name on any forum, always make up a new one, if you are active on multiple boards. Also, make the names completely something not related to you. Finally make up a few gmail and yahoo email accounts for different forums. Just those two actions alone will make research into somebody very difficult.

OhLook wrote in post #18815778
When I find a new entry in a challenge that closed a week ago, I'm annoyed because some moron failed to pay attention. . . . That annoyance is slight and momentary. If I try to add my photo of a beautiful bus ticket to the Used Bus Tickets thread, and a warning comes up telling me that the thread is old, something I already know, the annoyance is greater.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18815783
This is a classic "needs of the many vs needs of the one" problem.

A complication is that the various needs aren't all equal. I've bolded part of my quote to emphasize the difference between two kinds of annoyance. To be told something I'm fully aware of offends me. You've probably seen the recent term "mansplaining." It's like that.

Me (posting): "I'm glad I found this old thread because I got a shot today of a beautiful bus ticket and didn't want to start a new thread for it."
Software: "Hold on there, you're reviving a ten-year-old thread."
Me: "Yeah, I know. I'm not as dumb as I look."

I'm not sure that "the many" have a real need in such situations at all.