Want To Close The Diamond Thread?

Here's your chance to vote on it!

It hasnt already died?

I'm starting to believe in censorship.

I think ECCIE staff need to decide whether or not old discussions can be reopened at all. There's no forum guideline saying that *discussions* older than 30 days can't be bumped, only *reviews*. I see some mods closing old threads and some leaving them open (though more commonly it's the former, which is what I prefer).

If I choose not to view it, I won't but why should I try and deny other a chance to have their say on a thread, even an old one?

I vote leave it open.

Where's the 'I don't care' check box?

The rule is - older than 90 days w/o a post, it's too old to reactivate. Mods have leeway within their own districts which is why you sometimes see a difference in enforcement.
I often let a thread be reactivated in one of my low-traffic forums just to get the traffic. D&T is anything but low-traffic, however. Still, I don't enforce it strictly here either but, as in the "green dot" thread - well, that was just egregious.
There has been enough comment on this thread that since it is so old, and since the thread has been hijacked so often and since so many have groaned about it - the kinder and gentler mod has put up a poll.

- the kinder and gentler mod has put up a poll. Originally Posted by John Bull

oxymoron.

Quick JB close it right now while I still have the final word lol.

Oh hell nevermind more posts have been added leave the stupid thing open ;(

I think there should at least be consistency in policy within a forum (if different forums want different norms, fine). I really don't see the distinction between the "Diamond" thread and the Green Dot thread. In fact in the case of the GD thread valuable new information was actually shared regarding GD business practices.

In general I have no problem with keeping threads open. At least the history/context is right there and the reader doesn't need to search for it.

On the otherhand I have a pet peeve with longer (dormant or otherwise) threads. At some point they vear off topic and turn into little private jokes/conversations between a few members.

I'd be open to a system where all threads were capped at 50 & if someone really had something to add they could start a new thread, e.g. xyz Part 2

The rule is - older than 90 days w/o a post, it's too old to reactivate. Mods have leeway within their own districts which is why you sometimes see a difference in enforcement.
I often let a thread be reactivated in one of my low-traffic forums just to get the traffic. D&T is anything but low-traffic, however. Still, I don't enforce it strictly here either but, as in the "green dot" thread - well, that was just egregious.
There has been enough comment on this thread that since it is so old, and since the thread has been hijacked so often and since so many have groaned about it - the kinder and gentler mod has put up a poll. Originally Posted by John Bull

Had no idea this was a democracy. I thought it was a dictatorship.

I voted NOT to close it b/c I don't like censorship. But the thread has gotten really tiresome. I think alt's idea of a cap has a lot of merit.

Where's the 'I don't care' check box? Originally Posted by Sa_artman

London, why are you online tonight?

No Valerie, and I had an appt. when Megan wanted to go eat. I am very sad.

Well guys, as you can see, the vote was close but per the will of the people, this being a democracy and all, the thread stays open til the last poster changes the last subject.

BTW - AltComedy, there is much merit in what you say but to implement something like that would take a directive from on high simply because it differs so much from standard practice. I can hear the screaming now the first time I close a thread with 50 posts right in front of someone who just had to have the last word.