Should comments on articles be closed after a period of time?


(Jonathan Pichot) #1

Do you think that conversations should go on forever, or should conversations prompted by an article last a certain period of time? And if so, how long should it be? 1 week? 1 month?


(Gene Fortner) #2

Archive after 60 days


(Kevin Seidel) #3

60 days sounds about right. Most are only active for about a week, so 30 days would even be workable. The only reason not to archive the conversation would be if there was no similar newer conversation.


(Billman) #4

I would suggest 30 days max. The possibility of anyone reading something posted after that time is remote.


(Warren Ruf) #5

While I would support a comment limit of 30 days, where do the articles go when they are pushed beyond the end of the page?


(George Tichy) #6

I agree that after 60 days the probability of people reading is insignificant. I understand that there will be an archive that one can always access.


(George Tichy) #7

Or they can just be moved to the end, by date, so that the newest will be showing on the top of the list. They don’t have to be closed. do they?


(Kevin Seidel) #8

A topic with over a thousand comments can be a bit of a challenge to start reading. Especially for people who don’t have a lot of time to spend on Spectrum. More topics and closing them more often would make it easier for the new person to catch up on the conversation.


(Interested Friend) #9

I would suggest no more than 45 days at the upper limit and 30 days at the lower limit.


(George Tichy) #10

When it reaches 1,844 comments, the system should automatically shut the door and archive the file! Before it reaches 2,300 comments. :smile:


(jeremy) #11

i think conversations should go on forever…five years from now we may need a reference and suddenly remember an article or comment that cited one…


(Cherilyn Clough) #12

Ha! I see what you did there. :slight_smile:


(Johnny Carson) #13

Having been a web forum moderator and web forum administrator for a number of years I’d say yes, discussion should be closed following a period of time. In my experience it was mostly individuals whose intent was to troll or otherwise stir things up who would mine for conversations to bring back to the top. A web forum discussion topic seems to have a natural lifespan of a few days to a few weeks depending on the topic. After that it probably should be left as a read only archived item. If the topic is one of importance it will come up again in the natural cycle of publishing new material.


(Dee Roberts) #14

My observation of how comments accumulate here is that most conversations run from a couple of days to a couple of weeks. If the comment period is held open 30 days it seem to me that would be sufficient for almost all of the conversations before being archived for later reference.


(k_Lutz) #15

Edit: I have had very little to no meaningful exchange 30 days after an article is posted. Closing comments at 30-45 days is reasonable as long as they are accessible indefinitely.
Since we have all this material from the beginning of (Spectrum-) time, keeping them open indefinitely sure would make it easier to comprehend and respond.

Trust God.


(David Lamoreaux) #16

I’ve seen useful comments on subjects posted even a year later. It helps to be able to read the previous posts to refresh one’s memory.


(Rohan Charlton) #17

Leave them open indefinitely. So what if 'trolls’necromance old threads. I enjoy seeing articles i would have otherwise not known existed.

Welcome all trolls, orks, goblins and…Canadians. Do your worst. We’re not afraid.


(George Tichy) #18

I agree, keep them all open. I realize now how many of them I missed.
An idea would be to have their dates next to the title (if possible) and then have them sorted out by date so we at least could know how old they are. But this may be asking too much from the Spectrum wizards.


(Rohan Charlton) #19

Good idea. We do need to know how old they are.


(jeremy) #20

very funny, rohan…and just so you know, aussies are probably even more deviant than canucks…after-all, wasn’t vandieman’s land at one time a penal colony for incorrigible prisoners…