What classifies a dying thread?

[Agent Proto]

Ok, so I'm looking at Sora!'s two week old "<a href="http://forums.eyesonff.com/showthread.php?t=76744">Puch in the face</a>" thread, and noticed he posted in the thread after a period of ten days with no replies, stating "I'd rather be punched in the face than slapped" and saw that Leeza closed it stating "Sora, if your thread is dying do not revive it unless you have something significant to add.". Now normally, if it was a month or so of no activity, that would be acceptable for the thread to be a "dead thread", but ten days? I don't think that's alright. What if another member posted the same thing as Sora! did? Would Leeza have closed it as well?

Anyway, that's not what I'm getting. My question is, what classifies a dying or dead thread? How long of inactivity should a thread have to be classified "dead"? I would like to hear from the Staff and members alike on this subject. Thanks for hearing me out.

[-N-]

Is it that time of the year already?

[Hawkeye]

A thread is dead when the thread is over two years over I think.

[eestlinc]

it depends on which forum the thread is in.

[Leeza]

I'm at work at the moment so I can't give a detailed reply, but Proto, I would think that you of all people (having been a Mod here and all) would have been able to PM me about this instead of making a thread considering all of this is implied to and about me directly.

If it had been another member I more than likely would have left it open. Sora!, however, has been warned many times for her spam and she has already bumped threads that were started by her/him. I considered his/her post here to be spam again so I closed her/his thread.

[Yamaneko]

We pretty much close threads on whim.

[Agent Proto]

Leeza: Well, that's dandy. It would have been nice if you had said that to Sora! when you closed the thread rather. It's just I found it odd that a thread was closed when someone "revived" a thread after ten days. Usually, that's been done if it was a few months or so.

btw, I'm not asking for the thread to be reopened.

And it's been almost two years since I have left staff, I know I could have just simply PM you, but I would like most or all of the staff to see and be aware of this 'problem' about "dead/dying" threads.

[Yamaneko]

There is no problem, though.

[Agent Proto]

Sure there is. How long does it take to make a thread "dead?" We can all agree that a thread that hasn't been active for months is pretty much classified dead, but a week?

[rubah]

I was thinking about this the other day. How weird it is when someone posts in a thread that I had mentally classified as 'gone' even if it had only been a week or two.

If there's no one bound to contribute anything grand to it, I'd say it's dead.

[Yamaneko]

This is General Chat we're talking about. A week's time pushes a thread to the third page probably. No one should be looking that far back.

[Dr Unne]

I believe Leeza has finally gone mad with power. Someone stop her before it's too late.

[Madonna]

Yeah, let's totally forget about history. It's not important.

Well, actually, all the good threads are archived. :|

[edczxcvbnm]

I believe Leeza has finally gone mad with power. Someone stop her before it's too late.

:love:

I MEAN! :eek:

Anyways, I think this is one of those times where you can create a line. If a thread is x amount of days old or on page x then it can not be revived. That way there is no question about it.

[NeoCracker]

Let Leeza do his thing, At times its quite funny,

[Raistlin]

Unne: :love:

Proto: there is no distinct line. The line is very arbitrary and depends mostly on the staffers' judgment and the circumstances (such as in this case, with Sora! being spammy). If you want to debate a specific thread being closed, that's fine and dandy, but debating the general rule of "when is a thread dead?" is pointless as the answer is "whenever the staff says it is." As it should be.

[rubah]

Raistlin, this thread had been dead for over an HOUR.
This is unacceptable.

[Raistlin]

See? With that kind of crap, I'd have a case. But not with a ten-day-old thread in GC (which puts it back several pages) being revived with a spammy post by its originator.

[Agent Proto]

Well I'll be damned.
*is damned*

:-x *loses*

This subject will not be discussed any further. Raistlin knows more than I do.

[Leeza]

I just get off work and the thread is already closed? Well I'm getting in the last post anyway. :)


Leeza: Well, that's dandy. It would have been nice if you had said that to Sora! when you closed the thread rather. It's just I found it odd that a thread was closed when someone "revived" a thread after ten days. Usually, that's been done if it was a few months or so.
Sora! already had many PMs about her/his posting so no more PMs/explanations are necessary.

btw, I'm not asking for the thread to be reopened.
It won't be. :)

And it's been almost two years since I have left staff, I know I could have just simply PM you, but I would like most or all of the staff to see and be aware of this 'problem' about "dead/dying" threads.
You needed worry about the Staff missing something, Proto, as we communicate with each other very well about <b>all</b> <i>problems</i>. :)

[rubah]

yeah, like how I'm gonna get rid of this rash:(

[eestlinc]

yea, it used to be all fun and games in the staff forum until we let all these women in there. Now it's all "my feet hurt" and "let's eat chocolate" and "Bruce Willis is so hot!" It's almost enough to make a man cry. If fact, Yams does cry.

[rubah]

Hsu has been in the crying corner for three days straight now.

[Shoeberto]

Just because you keep calling me fat :(