Old posts - Poll

Value of older posts

  • I would not want to see them deleted but moved to an archive area where nobody could reply/search.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • All older content is useless and makes a forum look dated.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    61

indietalk

IndieTalk Founder
Staff member
Admin
This is simply out of my own curiosity so do not think this means a decision will be made, I am just curious about the value of older posts... I understand sentimental value but also there can be bloat and irrelevance.

Keep in mind, a lot of members leave, a lot of links become dead, and a lot of tech info becomes irrelevant. Plus the older promotion.

With that in mind please vote! Multiple choice. Just wondering how many people care about older stuff. Thanks!
 

Sweetie

Member
This is an interesting question.

I'd see two sides to this. One would be user experience. It's a little annoying (but not too much) when I see the older stuff appear again in the new feed when randoms reply to 5+ year old threads.

Bloat may slow down the system?

Removing older posts may reduce google search people coming back.
It may also remove relevant posts where people can search for answers - do people actually use the search button before asking the same question for the 50th time?
 

indietalk

IndieTalk Founder
Staff member
Admin
It is actually very beneficial to SEO (search engine optimization/indexing) but I left that out of the equation simply because I want to hear about the user experience. But you are correct.

I feel like an archive is a pretty good idea. And it could be automated to archive it, not based on the age of the first post, but instead, the age of the last reply. Letting older threads live if they are popular. So a thread from 2008 with a reply from last week could still live. But if a year lapses, archive it with search engine accessibility. Etc.
 

Sweetie

Member
As I was trying to say, it's a little annoying when old threads get replied to, but it's easy enough to ignore those. If it a good idea to fix what isn't broke? If the site is working fine with the old threads in place...
 

sfoster

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Every once in a while you'll see someone get confused and think an old thread that was bumped is new. they'll spend their time typing out a thoughtful reply to someone that hasn't been on the site in over a year.

I think it makes sense to close old threads to prevent necro posting.
If someone wants to bump an old thread with something relevant they can make a new post and provide a link to the old one..

Then again there are some threads that should be allowed to remain cohesive.. like if harvey weinstein gets prison time or something i'd like to add that to my thread following his events.
 
I've made several choices, and I don't care, but I would suggest deleting them. For one, if we know we're throwing out the old and useless information, we can put ourselves in a new frame of mind, so as to get a fresh outlook on the topics. Anyone who wants to save old threads can preserve them on their PC, and anyone who wants to save the information can jot down notes on the information presented in the discussions.

That said, in my work, some people have serious issues with hoarding documents, which can be bad for their residence, which is why I always shred my old documents - boxes of them - because I don't want clutter.
 

Maxsdad

Member
"Older post" does not mean a post is no longer relevant or no longer has any value. And how would older posts be culled? Who will decide what's "useless information" and what's valuable? And what's wrong with posting to an old thread? Because nobody's commented on a topic for several months, does that mean the issue is no longer relevant? Should someone forgo posting new and fresh information or ideas because people may get annoyed that "old threads are being bumped"? So what?BFD! I'm writing this TWO MONTHS after the last comment... should I keep quiet and not give my opinion because I missed some mythical deadline for responding? And when you cut through the horseshit and get down to brass tacks (sorry for the cliche), "culling old posts" is selective censorship. SOMEONE is deciding what EVERYONE else will be able to read.
 

sfoster

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
"Older post" does not mean a post is no longer relevant or no longer has any value. And how would older posts be culled? Who will decide what's "useless information" and what's valuable? And what's wrong with posting to an old thread? Because nobody's commented on a topic for several months, does that mean the issue is no longer relevant? Should someone forgo posting new and fresh information or ideas because people may get annoyed that "old threads are being bumped"? So what?BFD! I'm writing this TWO MONTHS after the last comment... should I keep quiet and not give my opinion because I missed some mythical deadline for responding? And when you cut through the horseshit and get down to brass tacks (sorry for the cliche), "culling old posts" is selective censorship. SOMEONE is deciding what EVERYONE else will be able to read.
Yup, someone is deciding (our admin indietalk). And this is a selectively censored forum.
There are rules in place and if people don't abide by those rules they get censored and their accounts are given an infraction. Multiple infractions result in a ban.

I think the rules are very reasonable and the extent of this selective censorship is standard practice for a web forum. It's moderated that way to streamline to user experience not to stifle your opinion. See I even responded instead of closing the old thread :lol:
 

Top