Searching for Old Threads

[Daily Commute]

A fact I commented on until someone took it upon themselves to remove the post without so much as a PM. :mad: I see NO point in reviving ancient threads. It's ALWAYS newbies doing it too. Regular members can't search back 4-5 years so why do the newbies have access to them?
(From http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=1119350&postcount=51)

Is this true?

Personally, I like it when people bring up old threads. It's interesting to see what others have said. I think we need to think twice about thread-jacking substantive threads with our own posting pet peeves. Of course, a little constructive criticism is fair, but it can get out of control.

[Joe Gardner]

All the threads are searchable, it doesn't matter if your a guest, newbie or regular member. Currently, any thread can be re-opened, be it a thread thats 5 days old, or 5 years old.

A few members have brought up the idea of locking threads after no activity for X amount of months, this would effectively put all older threads into an archive mode, read only, but still searchable.

I myself don't mind having threads that are a year or two old being brought back from the dead, I would love to hear what others thing of that issue.

[KrisPistofferson]

I've never minded, but apparently it's like kryptonite to some people.

[Raiyn]

All the threads are searchable, .
Not true. I've tried to look up specific threads (that I have links to anyway) and came up with nothing past a certain point in 2003. So no that's incorrect. I still want the archive mode as the majority of the posts that are brought back are responses to people who haven't been hear since they originally posted the message, thereby making any response irrelevant. the rest of the time they respond to things that have been discussed a LOT more recently usually resulting in two active threads on the exact same topic.
EDIT: I just tried it again and the engine gave me a couple of them from back in 02 It didn't work before

[MediaCreations]

I have no problem with old threads being re-opened.

In the most recent case of the 'Bikes are too expensive' thread, there has been a lot of interest and lots of posts added to the thread this time around.

To me this shows that the subject is still worth discussing. I don't understand the need to block old threads from being revived. (And I quite enjoyed seeing some old names in the thread. :) )

[Rowan]

Old subject, new people, new opinions. Fine by me. I just have to be careful not to jump in with a comment that may (or may not) be the same as one I made <x> years ago!!

[Guest]

Old threads being opened is like kryptonite. I swear I see a rash coming on my arms.

If it's relevant, I don't have a problem personally, but when someone responds to something that's clearly resolved and/or already dead, gone, and never to return... dang... I can't stand it.

Koffee

[nick burns]

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

-George Santayana

[Daily Commute]

I see Koffee's point--there's a difference between intentionally re-opening an old debate and cluelessly answering a question in a three-year-old thread.

[Raiyn]

I see Koffee's point--there's a difference between intentionally re-opening an old debate and cluelessly answering a question in a three-year-old thread.
Which is what usually happens

[Daily Commute]

But then the question is whether forum users are enjoying the new discussion. If they are, there's no reason to jump in and fill the thread with graffiti complaining that someone, 16 posts previously, carelessly re-started an interesting thread. The re-started thread will stand or fall on its own. If few are interested, it will quickly slip back into the archives.

[Guest]

I still think we ought to let threads close and lock if it's been a few months if they're inactive. If people want to start new threads on the matter, I'd be cool.

Koffee