So what 'confusion' does my reply to a 2-year old thread bring?

[Tgabber]

Whas is just because I supported someone proposing a steam real-time clock? Perhaps I could do it for you, I am (a rather old now) computer scientist.

Would 'John' reply asn make this more clear?

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Depends on the context.

If someone post in a old discussion that haven't been active for years, and already been answered, then make sense they may lock it so people wouldn't bump it, and add meaningless question that was already answered, derailing it with their own problem with something else, or giving same answer someone already had given it.

If someone post in a old discussion that hasn't been answered, then make sense someone might post in it about new answer. The only way I see it getting locked is if someone bump it to agure with someone years later, giving complaint, posting their own issue that not related, or bumping it for the sake of whatever reason.

But far things go they may more likely close a discussion if it old, and I seen people bump discussion that are ~10 years old for good, bad, or dumb reasons.

[Tito Shivan]

It's about this thread, right?
https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/1640927348828800455/

The actual mods seem to lock any old thread that gets bumped. Not really minding if the bump was ontopic or not.

The 'confussion' they refer to is people not noticing they're posting on a really old thread instead of on a recent one.

[Jaiiime]

In this context, the term "confusion" refers to the potential misunderstanding or unintended consequences that may arise from bumping or reviving an old thread. When users respond to very old threads, it may lead to the following issues:

Outdated Information: The information or proposals in the old thread may no longer be relevant due to updates or changes that have occurred since the thread was last active.

Redundant Replies: If someone has already addressed or resolved the issue in the old thread, posting additional replies may lead to redundant answers and clutter the discussion.

Derailing Discussions: Reviving old threads with new discussions can lead to confusion and derail the original topic, making it harder for users to follow the conversation.

Confusing Timestamps: New replies to old threads may give the impression of recent activity, causing confusion among users who may think it's a current discussion.

While supporting a proposal is a positive contribution, posting in an old thread might not have the desired impact, especially if it's been inactive for an extended period. In such cases, it is often more effective to create a new and up-to-date thread to express your support for the proposal or discuss the topic further.

As a computer scientist, your insights and input can be valuable in community discussions, and starting a fresh thread related to the Steam real-time clock proposal could be a great way to engage others in a current and relevant conversation.

Remember that the intention behind moderating old threads is to ensure that discussions remain timely and focused. If you have valuable input or ideas, creating new discussions can help ensure that your contributions are seen and appreciated by the community members who are actively participating in the forums.

[wesnef]

I'm always amazed when people are surprised by "we autolock ancient threads that get bumped" policies, because they've been standard on basically every game forum I've been on for the past 10-20 years.


edit: and with how many "live service"/MMO/etc games there are now, it's even more relevant of a policy. Bumping a thread that talks about game systems/etc that haven't existed for many patches just messes everything up.

(and then, of course, there's the idiots who do it deliberately, bumping threads from 2018 with stupid "No you" or "Well I disagree" posts)

[Haruspex]

Yeah, inactive threads past a certain age should probably autolock themselves to avoid these misunderstandings.

[Freyr_O]

Originally posted by Tgabber:

So what 'confusion' does my reply to a 2-year old thread bring?

I was so confused by your reply that I accidentally choked on some food, spilt some coffee on my brand-new shirt, and nearly tripped while going into the kitchen to clean my shirt.

SO, it's definitely good the moderator closed the thread. Confusion is like really really bad.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by wesnef:

I'm always amazed when people are surprised by "we autolock ancient threads that get bumped" policies, because they've been standard on basically every game forum I've been on for the past 10-20 years.

The problem some see is it clashes with this on the home of the Discussions:

Searching is key! Before you post a question, use the forum search feature to determine whether your topic has already been covered.

[BJWyler]

Originally posted by wesnef:

I'm always amazed when people are surprised by "we autolock ancient threads that get bumped" policies, because they've been standard on basically every game forum I've been on for the past 10-20 years.


edit: and with how many "live service"/MMO/etc games there are now, it's even more relevant of a policy. Bumping a thread that talks about game systems/etc that haven't existed for many patches just messes everything up.

(and then, of course, there's the idiots who do it deliberately, bumping threads from 2018 with stupid "No you" or "Well I disagree" posts)

It's not just game discussions. That goes for any forum, and that goes back to the early days of the 90's. I've always been a fan of auto-locking because over the course of those 30 years, the number of times that I have seen a necro that was actually beneficial doesn't even rise to a full percentage point.

Originally posted by Tito Shivan:

Originally posted by wesnef:

I'm always amazed when people are surprised by "we autolock ancient threads that get bumped" policies, because they've been standard on basically every game forum I've been on for the past 10-20 years.

The problem some see is it clashes with this on the home of the Discussions:

Searching is key! Before you post a question, use the forum search feature to determine whether your topic has already been covered.

And that's the thing. Searching has always been the key, and that's not the actual issue. The real issue arises when people feel the compulsion to make a reply in an old thread - and 9.9 times out of 10, that reply is completely unnecessary. Searching is the first thing I do when I am looking for a bit of information on a subject or am troubleshooting an issue. Not once, and I mean NEVER have I ever felt the need to post in a thread that was more than a couple weeks old as of the last reply, related to what I was searching. Only, and I mean ONLY, if I could not find anything more recent than a 6-12 month old thread did I ever post anything about the information or problem I was searching - and in that case, it was always to create a new thread about it. And honestly, as I try to think about it, I can't come up with more than half a dozen threads that I created over the last 30 years in that scenario.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is a reason the Necro is bad etiquette, and that's because 99.9% of the time, it is wholly unnecessary.

[Tgabber]

Well an autolock would be the answer but when a thread search resulted in the thread I replied to as the top result that was the thread I used.

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Originally posted by Tgabber:

Whas is just because I supported someone proposing a steam real-time clock? Perhaps I could do it for you, I am (a rather old now) computer scientist.

Would 'John' reply asn make this more clear?

I've extremely rarely (like, less than 1% of the time) seen a necro which didn't negatively impact a thread. Most of the time the subject of the thread itself isn't even up to date and many (if not all) of the information in it is also outdated. This is especially true for games which are always updated or even worse EA games which sometimes don't even look like what they actually were a year prior.

So, as a rule of thumb: don't necro threads unless you are the thread starter and it is extremely important that you continue on the same discussion.

Edit: Just so you know, the best way of action in such a cause is usually simply start a new thread and reference the older one via a link.

[kaki_gamet]

@Tgabber - the discussion is again unlocked, thanks for your support there

[Chika Ogiue]

Originally posted by wesnef:

I'm always amazed when people are surprised by "we autolock ancient threads that get bumped" policies, because they've been standard on basically every game forum I've been on for the past 10-20 years.


edit: and with how many "live service"/MMO/etc games there are now, it's even more relevant of a policy. Bumping a thread that talks about game systems/etc that haven't existed for many patches just messes everything up.

(and then, of course, there's the idiots who do it deliberately, bumping threads from 2018 with stupid "No you" or "Well I disagree" posts)

You'd think a company of programmers would have coded their forums to automatically lock any thread past a certain age that hadn't been posted in for a certain period of time. Running such a check when someone fetches the thread from the database to read it -- or better (for the database) when someone attempts to reply to it.

Then all these moderators wouldn't have to waste time explaining how an old thread is confusing.

[D. Flame]

I always found this hilarious. It is a catch-22.

If you make a new thread it's all, "You should have searched to see if there was another topic on the matter and posted in that thread instead.

But if you do actually post in that other thread, it's all, "please don't bump old thread."

[Eagle_of_Fire]

What _I_ find hilarious is that you seem to believe those two extremely different situations to be similar in nature.

[C²C^Guyver |NZB|]

Originally posted by D. Flame:

I always found this hilarious. It is a catch-22.

If you make a new thread it's all, "You should have searched to see if there was another topic on the matter and posted in that thread instead.

But if you do actually post in that other thread, it's all, "please don't bump old thread."

https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/9/3812910932501155292/


Or you just read the information that has already been available and not post anything.