15 Comments

been mentioned many a time, nothing ever done about it. I get what you mean, as i've reported all my old threads(go through em every few months) and they all get bumped to the top and take up the whole first and second page lol...

supermod

We were sometimes closing threads by posting a comment in the edit section of the last post, but we found that a lot of members weren't aware that they should report threads to be closed & it was resulting in an increase in the number of infractions / warnings being subsequently issued. Because of this we now have to post in the thread when we close / lock them unless it is a very old one, or there has been an infraction that requires all current threads to be closed & we need to inform other members in the relevant threads the reason why it's been closed or just that trading has ceased.

In theory people should report threads to be closed as the transaction closes & there will only be a block of posts closed by one member if they were previously unaware of the rule. So there is a specific reason for the MOD post now, but the actual OP doesn't need to post a close comment - they can edit their last post with an update if they want, but should still report it as normal via the button to be closed. thanks :thumbsup:

Original Poster Banned

i sometimes wonder why the feedback board is even here, as for the reasons given for this not happening, it seems pretty daft in my opinion, as my posts clearly says @ ops request, so to answer its because people dont know they have to report is a pretty lame response really

Admin

OK, so say we edit someone's thread to put the date in as opposed to making a new post.
What if the last person to post in the thread wasn't the OP? We edit the post to put in our thread lock, then they reedit their post.. how do we know the thread closure date?

With a new post, noone can edit, there's no argument with regards to thread closure date. It's uniform- done the same everytime.

juliet_bravo;4457825

OK, so say we edit someone's thread to put the date in as opposed to … OK, so say we edit someone's thread to put the date in as opposed to making a new post.What if the last person to post in the thread wasn't the OP? We edit the post to put in our thread lock, then they reedit their post.. how do we know the thread closure date? With a new post, noone can edit, there's no argument with regards to thread closure date. It's uniform- done the same everytime.



So when you lock a thread, it is still possible to edit a post in it? :thinking:

Original Poster Banned

you cannot edit a locked thread

thesaint;4458561

So when you lock a thread, it is still possible to edit a post in it? … So when you lock a thread, it is still possible to edit a post in it? :thinking:



I believe you can if you are a moderator.

Original Poster Banned

emasu;4458621

I believe you can if you are a moderator.



why would a mod re-edit it?

sassie;4458601

you cannot edit a locked thread



That's what I thought.

So why can't the mods simply write in the last post the time it was locked?
Does it matter if the OP didn't post the last comment in the thread?

Original Poster Banned

thesaint;4458639

That's what I thought.So why can't the mods simply write in the last post … That's what I thought.So why can't the mods simply write in the last post the time it was locked?Does it matter if the OP didn't post the last comment in the thread?



because of another mod re editing it it seems :?

Admin

Well I did think that members could edit their old posts whether a thread is locked or not but you're right. However, as I said before, it's more uniform to do it the way we're doing it right now. We had a discussion regarding it a while back and it was decided that this was the best way.

any chance of just adding a button to the OP that can request a thread close and time stamp?

Original Poster Banned

If a member reports a thread to be locked it is pretty obvious they know they have to eport the thread to get it locked, i still dont see the problem here, when members have 10 threads going and report them all you then bump their 10 threads in locking them which means someones fs thread quickly bumps to the second page before even being spotted, specially when that said person relist another 10 threads at time of you locking their 10 threads, thats now 20 of their threads being bumped, yes not a big deal to some but there are some on here now listing 1 item per thread, havng 10, 20 threads at a time, maybe if you dont want to change the way you close them then you should look at sy's idea of only allowing a certain amount of open threads, this would help with both

juliet_bravo;4457825

OK, so say we edit someone's thread to put the date in as opposed to … OK, so say we edit someone's thread to put the date in as opposed to making a new post.What if the last person to post in the thread wasn't the OP? We edit the post to put in our thread lock, then they reedit their post.. how do we know the thread closure date? With a new post, noone can edit, there's no argument with regards to thread closure date. It's uniform- done the same everytime.



Why not put it in the first post then? That's visible on every thread and I wouldn't have though members can remove it.

John
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text