|
Re: Do we ever want to freeze threads?
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Dec 30, 2004 at 15:51 UTC |
I don't want to freeze threads. I have found it very useful to go back to very old threads and provide new responses. New responses to old threads of mine have also been really nice.
Now, I can see wanting to freeze nodes after, say, a month. That should provide similar twiddling capabilities, right?
Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing.
Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid.
Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence.
Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.
| [reply] |
|
It's a really tough call .. Originally my thought was to prevent people from replying to a node that was a year or more old. But in addition I suppose it could also be used to prevent someone from modifying (or deleting, as per mt2k) an old node. Then again, updating is OK -- as in, adding something to the bottom.
It's really not black and white, is it.
Alex / talexb / Toronto
"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds
| [reply] |
|
| [reply] |
Re: Do we ever want to freeze threads?
by TrekNoid (Pilgrim) on Dec 30, 2004 at 18:42 UTC |
| [reply] |
|
| [reply] |
|
I don't think we should be freezing threads. There may be extremely rare and special cases for freezing threads, but overall I don't think it helps the readers and posters.
| [reply] |
Re: Do we ever want to freeze threads?
by kutsu (Priest) on Dec 30, 2004 at 19:28 UTC |
This was actually my reply to freezing voting after a certain time, but my stance on threads like OT: The WarriorMonks still seems to apply to this discussion.
Update: Fixed link
"Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - I think that I think, therefore I think that I am." Ambrose Bierce
| [reply] |
Re: Do we ever want to freeze threads?
by castaway (Parson) on Dec 30, 2004 at 20:12 UTC |
Just one question: Why?
You seem to be wanting to discuss something with no particular reason for doing it. If you actually had a good one, to do or not do it, this thread might have a purpose in life ;)
For the record, I see no reason why we should. (Making old nodes uneditable would be more useful, IMO, I would guess 99% of fiddling goes on with hours/days of creation)
C. | [reply] |
|
Because I thought it might be useful to prevent someone replying to a node that's several years old. That's because it's very unlikely that anyone's going to see it, and in any case it's probably in the wrong place.
However this seems like a pretty unpopular idea .. that's fine, I just thought I'd suggest it. Just trying to be creative here.
Alex / talexb / Toronto
"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds
| [reply] |
|
Because I thought it might be useful to prevent someone replying to a node that's several years old.
There's nothing wrong with replying to a node that's several years old. Why is a discussion over hashes from two years ago no longer valid today?
That's because it's very unlikely that anyone's going to see it, and in any case it's probably in the wrong place.
Of course someone will see it. Discussions are valuable beyond any supposed expiration date. Many people use Search (or even Google) to find very useful old discussions on Perlmonks that help them with current situations. Any contributions made to such threads from the date of creation onward are of value - including the contributions of the person who found it useful.
This isn't Slashdot. Discussions here are valid without end. There is no reason, in 2005, to be discussing how unfair it is that Kevin Mitnick is still being held in prison in an article posted to Slashdot in 2001. However, an in-depth discussion on map/join from 2003 is certainly worthwhile today. That is the major difference.
| [reply] |
Re: Do we ever want to freeze threads?
by petdance (Parson) on Dec 31, 2004 at 22:11 UTC |
Do YOU see any benefit in preventing people from commenting?
| [reply] |
|
Nope -- the idea has received lots and lots of negative feedback, so at this point I'm sorry I even made the suggestion. It's an idea that no one loves, so it's toast.
But :) thanks for asking.
Alex / talexb / Toronto
"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds
| [reply] |
