cbg
Super Moderator
There's been some discussion about whether or not older threads should be closed. While I am one of the stronger proponants of posters opening their own threads instead of adding to someone else's, and of new posters not adding comments to dead threads, I recognize that the logistics of doing so would be difficult and time consuming.
I truly do not see the purpose of adding to old threads. Laws change, and attempting to update all previous threads instead of tacitly acknowledging such and moving on would be as onerous a task as closing all old ones. People's situations resolve to the point where it's unnecessary; what is the point of offering advice to a sixteen year old who wants to emancipate - five years after the fact? Regular responders have limited time and don't need to be reading through a situation that no longer exists. (If a new poster truly believes that they have information that would be so valuable to a past poster that it should not be missed, perhaps they could open an informational post pointing out the new statute or case law that they believe has been overlooked.)
I have a suggestion for a compromise, however. On one forum where I post, if you started to reply to a post that was more than - I think it may have been 90 days old - a notice popped up reminding the new responder that the post was an older one, as well as some of what I have indicated above - that the laws may have changed since the thread was started and that the situation may well have been resolved. The responder had to acknowledge this in a check box before he could advance and respond to the thread.
From reading many of the responses that are attached to older threads, I suspect that more such posters than not simply do not notice the dates.
I truly do not see the purpose of adding to old threads. Laws change, and attempting to update all previous threads instead of tacitly acknowledging such and moving on would be as onerous a task as closing all old ones. People's situations resolve to the point where it's unnecessary; what is the point of offering advice to a sixteen year old who wants to emancipate - five years after the fact? Regular responders have limited time and don't need to be reading through a situation that no longer exists. (If a new poster truly believes that they have information that would be so valuable to a past poster that it should not be missed, perhaps they could open an informational post pointing out the new statute or case law that they believe has been overlooked.)
I have a suggestion for a compromise, however. On one forum where I post, if you started to reply to a post that was more than - I think it may have been 90 days old - a notice popped up reminding the new responder that the post was an older one, as well as some of what I have indicated above - that the laws may have changed since the thread was started and that the situation may well have been resolved. The responder had to acknowledge this in a check box before he could advance and respond to the thread.
From reading many of the responses that are attached to older threads, I suspect that more such posters than not simply do not notice the dates.
