Old threads should they be deleted after a year?

[ericmark]

Unless the thread has been pinned or similar as some thing which is of interest for years to come, should it not be deleted after a year? Regulations change, and treads years old can often contain information no longer valid.

But a google search often brings up posts many years old, often linked pictures are now missing, contributors have long left the forum, and law changes have resulted in the answers now being wrong.

 

[ETAF]

i dont think so - a year is a short time, i have used posts on various forums over a year old.
BUT

Regulations change, and treads years old can often contain information no longer valid.

is a good point , and of course will apply almost post by post,

and so a moderators work would be quite high to maintain that info

But they should be locked after a certain time of inactivity - so they cannot be replied to , nothing worse than a reply to a post thats 5+ years old which often happens on here

and a flag - like other forums - excel for example - thats says how old the thread is as a warning

i must admit i have search here just now for "track saw" and in the first 10 results i got a 2008 post , which i could also reply to
perhaps the search should have a default age restriction , with the option to unset that , rater than set the dates up , which i sometimes do

 

[Why Not Indeed]

No, they shouldn't be deleted. Maybe moved to "archive.diynot.com" to make it obvious that they're obsolete. But who is going to keep on top of that? Would be a full-time job.

 

[JohnW2]

No, they shouldn't be deleted. Maybe moved to "archive.diynot.com" to make it obvious that they're obsolete. But who is going to keep on top of that? Would be a full-time job.

I agree - and if there were to be deleted, I think that, as has been said, a year would not be long enough.

As regards the (not uncommon) issue of people not noticing that they are responding to a very old post (mainly due to the wretched "Similar Threads" stuff at the bottom of the page!), it might be possible for one to have to jump through a few more hoops before being allowed to reply to a post of, say, more than a year or two old - just to make sure that one didn't do so 'accidentally'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

i must admit i have search here just now for "track saw" and in the first 10 results i got a 2008 post , which i could also reply to
perhaps the search should have a default age restriction , with the option to unset that , rater than set the dates up , which i sometimes do

As I think you may be implying in your final bit there, at the bottom of the Search page there is an option to specify sort order. The default seems to be 'relevance' (whatever that means!) but if one selects 'Date', then one gets the results sorted in date order, with the most recent first.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ETAF]

heres is an example of a notice on age of threads , from one of my recent posts on excel forum

 

[JohnW2]

heres is an example of a notice on age of threads , from one of my recent posts on excel forum

Exactly the same used to happen here - but, having just tested (sorry, folks!!), it no longer happens.

I have asked mods if they can re-instate that behaviour.

Kind Regards, John

 

[oldbutnotdead]

Exactly the same used to happen here - but, having just tested (sorry, folks!!), it no longer happens.

I have asked mods if they can re-instate that behaviour.

Kind Regards, John

It wasn't a false memory then- I was sure a zombie thread warning used to pop up. Yes please bring it back
As for archiving or deleting old threads- no, as long as they have dates on them leave them alone, there are some very useful old discussions on here. If it was easy to do it wouldn't be a bad feature to have a warning header about regs may have changed on posts more than a year old

 

[Why Not Indeed]

Never mind full time job - it should be possible to train an AI system to do exactly this. The forum is mostly text, the regulations are mostly text, how hard can it be?(!!!)

 

[JohnW2]

Never mind full time job - it should be possible to train an AI system to do exactly this. The forum is mostly text, the regulations are mostly text, how hard can it be?(!!!)

I have to bear in mind that "almost nothing is impossible", but the fact that the forum and the regs are both 'mostly text' is but a very small start to defining the issue to be addressed

Kind Regards, John

 

[Why Not Indeed]

TBH I'm not sure the problem space is even worth addressing. If you want professional advice, you pay for it, it's not reasonable to expect it from volunteers on the internet. The most you are entitled to expect from a forum is "not gratuitously wrong".

P.S. should this thread have been deleted? It's a decade old!

Out dated posts on the forum

As time as gone on the BS7671 has been upgraded and Part P has altered plus links have vanished. Yet internet search can still bring up posts from 2002. Some of the advice given is now well out of date BAS links to This Part P page repeatedly which in turn links to other out dated or deleted...

www.diynot.com

 

[JohnW2]

TBH I'm not sure the problem space is even worth addressing. If you want professional advice, you pay for it, it's not reasonable to expect it from volunteers on the internet.

Very true, but ....

The most you are entitled to expect from a forum is "not gratuitously wrong".

I think my view of "the most one is entitled to" would also include it having a method of bringing people's attention (where appropriate) to the fact that a post was old hence, even if correct when written, might now be 'out-of-date'.

In that sense, I suppose I agree with eric that, if we are NOT to reinstate such 'warnings', then it would probably be better for 'old' posts not to remain accessible at all. However, as I've said, I would personally favour their remaining available ('for ever') but with the appropriate 'warnings'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

Very true, but ....

I think my view of "the most one is entitled to" would also include it having a method of bringing people's attention (where appropriate) to the fact that a post was old hence, even if correct when written, might now be 'out-of-date'.

In that sense, I suppose I agree with eric that, if we are NOT to reinstate such 'warnings', then it would probably be better for 'old' posts not to remain accessible at all. However, as I've said, I would personally favour their remaining available ('for ever') but with the appropriate 'warnings'.

Kind Regards, John

However I certainly agree a year is far too short to delete them.
But it seems this is not a new idea of Erics, from 2013:

As time as gone on the BS7671 has been upgraded and Part P has altered plus links have vanished. Yet internet search can still bring up posts from 2002.

Some of the advice given is now well out of date BAS links to This Part P page repeatedly which in turn links to other out dated or deleted pages.

For any administration to keep tabs would be near impossible. But there are posts about changing a fuse box to a consumer unit posted before there was any Part P telling readers what that can do. Yes I know there is a date but when doing an internet search one does not always notice the date or realise things have changed.

Should the forum limit the old post dates available to say 2008 when there was a major change?

Also should posters be responsible for checking linked sites at time of posting. OK I know there will always be errors I have done it myself linking to IET site not realising one needs to be registered maybe even a member before one can read the page. But to continue copy and paste lists of outdated and discontinued pages is clearly wrong once it has been pointed out.

 

[JohnW2]

However I certainly agree a year is far too short to delete them.

Yes, I think most of us who have commented have agreed with that.

But it seems this is not a new idea of Erics, from 2013:

Indeed. Ironically, if I'm not mistaken, there speaks the man who still only has the 2008 version of BS7671 to refer to

Kind Regards, John

 

[john4703]

Would it be better to lock threads after one, two or three years? The thread would remain, but it would be impossible to post on a locked thread. This would stop old threads suddenly appearing at the top of the list.