Post #1 · Posted at 2008-03-23 10:06:09am 17.2 years ago
 al2k4 | |
|---|---|
 |
Admin |
| 9,401 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2006-05-01 | |
 | |
| "BEMANI Sound Team" | |
Last Update: 2008-03-23 16:30 GMT
Hey guys, just wanting some votes for when you think a thread should be locked after a certain period of inactivity to prevent inappropriate bumping.
a. 2 months. (0 votes)
b. 3 months. (9 votes)
c. 4 months. (0 votes)
d. 5 months. (0 votes)
e. 6 months. (0 votes)
I'm personally opting for 3 months.
I'll count the votes on 2008-03-24 00:00 GMT and go with whichever option gets the most votes.
Hey guys, just wanting some votes for when you think a thread should be locked after a certain period of inactivity to prevent inappropriate bumping.
a. 2 months. (0 votes)
b. 3 months. (9 votes)
c. 4 months. (0 votes)
d. 5 months. (0 votes)
e. 6 months. (0 votes)
I'm personally opting for 3 months.
I'll count the votes on 2008-03-24 00:00 GMT and go with whichever option gets the most votes.
Post #2 · Posted at 2008-03-23 10:07:57am 17.2 years ago
| e-s-g | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 2,207 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-11-16 | |
I would say 3 months as well, that seems to be the most apprpriete and/or amount of time a thread would need before nothing else useful could really be contributed to it.
Post #3 · Posted at 2008-03-23 03:35:04pm 17.2 years ago
| roy2009xedit | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 5,221 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2008-02-10 | |
| "jubeat knit one, purl two" | |
I'd go with 3 months for the most active forums and 5 months for the less active.
Post #4 · Posted at 2008-03-23 04:13:46pm 17.2 years ago
| lukeyboysonic | |
|---|---|
 |
Banned |
| 750 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2008-02-04 | |
I would say 3 months too.
Post #5 · Posted at 2008-03-23 04:17:13pm 17.2 years ago
| Phantasmal | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 425 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2008-02-15 | |
| "Mizore Shirayuki's #1 Fan" | |
3 months.
Post #6 · Posted at 2008-03-23 07:24:51pm 17.2 years ago
| Oni-91 | |
|---|---|
 |
Moderator+ |
| 13,518 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2006-10-20 | |
 | |
| "Popular bisexual disaster" | |
3 months normal, 5 months stickies.
Post #7 · Posted at 2008-03-23 08:25:26pm 17.2 years ago
| PyroManiacX | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 3,733 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-09-23 | |
| "Not dead yet!" | |
3 months as well
Post #8 · Posted at 2008-03-23 10:37:58pm 17.2 years ago
| silenttype01 | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 8,017 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-01-19 | |
| "DINGDONG♥HEARTS" | |
3 months
Post #9 · Posted at 2008-03-23 11:47:51pm 17.2 years ago
| deliriousXD | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 1,652 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2006-08-08 | |
| "BACK IT UP BACK IT UP" | |
3 months
Post #10 · Posted at 2008-03-24 06:27:54am 17.2 years ago
| hooky | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 2,683 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-07-28 | |
3 months normal, 6 months stickies
Post #11 · Posted at 2008-03-24 06:52:45am 17.2 years ago
| n00b_saib0t | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 2,393 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-02-05 | |
 | |
| "F***ing exhausted." | |
honestly, i dont think a lock after X months is needed. i think that after X months replying to said thread should include a check list, requiring you to check the reason for the bump. some times there is no need to make a new thread when there is a perfectly good one a few months old you can post in, provided you have good reason for the bump.
either way, your forum, your rules. i agree that 3 months is a pretty good rule.
either way, your forum, your rules. i agree that 3 months is a pretty good rule.
Post #12 · Posted at 2008-03-24 07:07:55am 17.2 years ago
| al2k4 | |
|---|---|
|
Admin |
| 9,401 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2006-05-01 | |
| |
| "BEMANI Sound Team" | |
Hmmm, how about this then:
Threshold is for when a user gets a warning if his or her post doesn't warrant a bump?
Threshold is for when a user gets a warning if his or her post doesn't warrant a bump?
Post #13 · Posted at 2008-03-24 03:34:17pm 17.2 years ago
| roy2009xedit | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 5,221 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2008-02-10 | |
| "jubeat knit one, purl two" | |
That sounds perfect.