1) Much as Pete said: a few months, probably not much more than 3...markiteight wrote: ↑2023-09-19 20:15 On another thread Matthias suggested locking posts after a certain period of inactivity and only allowing existing users the ability to unlock and post/edit. It turns out that may actually be possible. If it is, I have a few questions for the members:
1) What do you think would be an appropriate period of inactivity before a post is locked?
2) At what point (age of account, post count) should a user be allowed to access locked posts?
3) Do you think this is a good idea? If not, do you have any other ideas/suggestions?
Thanks in advance for your feedback and helping to maintain the quality of this forum!
-Moderator
2) Probably a month or 2; something like ten or twenty posts...
3) should be #1 ;) depends on how much effort to implement, and perception it gives of the forum with a whole bunch of locked threads - not exactly inviting to new members, but then I don't really understand joining a forum and starting by raking over old coals rather than an introduction or something topical...
Overall, I don't know that it's a big problem - the forum regulars will tend to spot it and, in most cases, where there's positive intent, prompt (re)direction from a mod would/should suffice.
Do new members get directed to the forum rules, like clicking to accept t's & c's, or do they currently just join & lurk, or launch into their agenda?
Realistically, necroposting is on the new joiner rather than a reason to lock things down, isn't it? And, if a new member questions, challenges, or is generally antagonistic in response to forum rules that's a red flag and needs moderator intervention, but that should be focused on the new member, more so than locking old(er) threads, imo.
Didn't intend to write that much. Tldr: locking seems heavy handed, maybe enough to flag to a mod if new members appear more intent on preaching than joining the discussion.