Why do you lock topics/threads?

[Trimak]

Tom's hardware comes up frequently when I search for information on Google but most of the time the threads are locked. This is a very large mistake.

Many times I have come across threads which have incorrect or outdated information but as they sit in Google and continue to build strength as top listed results from visits, people are being force fed incorrect information and this problem becomes more prolific with every visit to the thread directed from Google or any other external means.

We live in a global information society and this locking function only serves to create a growing source of misinformation.

It's hard enough trying to find good legitimate information with dramatically increasing amount of knowledge accessible on the internet. When someone comes to tom's hardware "the authority on tech" some will believe that actually stands for something. You need a mechanism that allows for the addition or modification of information if you insist on locking topics.

Welcome to the age of Innovation, hop to it.

 

[ahnilated]

Well if you aren't following the rules on Tom's the thread gets locked, you just have to deal with it and follow the rules.

 

[COLGeek]

Threads get locked for several reasons to include keeping people from necro-posting (posting to old threads that are no longer relevant, were previously answered), to keep spam under control, to deal with inappropriate behavior, etc.

Part of using the information provided by any forum is that users need to assess the validity of the information they use, including its timeliness. You are right that technology evolves at a rapid pace, but there is little value updating a thread that is 3 years old, for example, in many cases.

Just posting the new info/question/issue, is likely more relevant today, vice revisiting something no longer current.

 

[jpishgar]

COLGeek hits the nail on the head there as for reasons we lock threads. Threads are locked for a handful of reasons:

• The thread is too old
The older the thread, the more subject to necroposting it becomes. Necroposting is the practice of resurrecting ancient threads with a single reply, and can lessen or degrade the value of a forum's updated concurrency. Those old threads that drive folks from Google to us typically solve a problem, or discuss a problem to be solved. In the prior case, there's no need for a response. In the latter, it's far more useful, pertinent and logical to encourage the user to post a new thread - that way, the issue doesn't become convoluted.

• A thread has gotten out of hand
Threads which are out of control, violently veering off topic or subject to heightened controversy/contempt are locked when it is in the interest of the moderation team to seal the thread for safety reasons.

• A thread has run it's proper course
Sometimes, there's just nowhere else for a thread's discussion to go. Everything that needs to be said has been, and the matter is closed/solved.

• The thread is a notification
Some of the stickies you'll see are closed for comments, as these are announcements. Announcements, guidelines, ReadMe's and so forth are Closed for comment as a matter of course.

I hope this clarifies a bit more for you on the subject of thread closures.

-JP

 

[Trimak]

Well if you aren't following the rules on Tom's the thread gets locked, you just have to deal with it and follow the rules.

Obviously not what i'm talking about. Obviously, threads that don't follow the rules get locked for the obvious reasons. One would assume it's obvious that not what I am talking about if you read my question.

Threads get locked for several reasons to include keeping people from necro-posting (posting to old threads that are no longer relevant, were previously answered), to keep spam under control, to deal with inappropriate behavior, etc.

Part of using the information provided by any forum is that users need to assess the validity of the information they use, including its timeliness. You are right that technology evolves at a rapid pace, but there is little value updating a thread that is 3 years old, for example, in many cases.

Just posting the new info/question/issue, is likely more relevant today, vice revisiting something no longer current.

Ok so let me give you my most recent example which prompted the creation of this thread.

I typed into Google: "optimal HDD temp"

The second result is: "http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/361755-28-whats-optimal-temperature"

It's listed as solved and the "answer" is completely baseless and incorrect. In fact the answer is entirely on the contrary. One piece of research suggests that under 45C the lower the temperature of the hard drive, the higher the chance of failure.

Yet there that article stands, unable for people to amend it and correct the grossly baseless and misleading information.

Thread followed the rules? Yes.
Necro-posting? Highly helpful in most scenarios i've come across. We still use HDD and they run on electricity which still as a bi-product produce heat.
Previously answered? Sure if the answer is absolute and permanent but in many cases this is not so.
Timeliness? The thread is only a year old and not really time related until we stop using HDD which is not likely to occur anytime soon.
The fact the technology evolves so rapidly can also mean that an answer that was true can become incorrect and therefore needs to be amended or updated.
Updating is important because this information stays there forever and garners strength of presence merely through age.

If a thread is no longer relevant it should be deleted, not locked. Invisible from future eyes, not put on display in top 3 Google results.

See my perspective?

 

[ahnilated]

"Ok so let me give you my most recent example which prompted the creation of this thread.

I typed into Google: "optimal HDD temp"

The second result is: "http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/361755-28-whats-optim..."

It's listed as solved and the "answer" is completely baseless and incorrect. In fact the answer is entirely on the contrary. One piece of research suggests that under 45C the lower the temperature of the hard drive, the higher the chance of failure.

Yet there that article stands, unable for people to amend it and correct the grossly baseless and misleading information."

They are talking about keeping the temps under 45C because when you go over it caused HDD failure rates to go up and this is 100% true.

And to your perspective, it is just that. I don't see why they should remove something that was posted until they choose to or if they choose to.

 

[jpishgar]

In this case, the original poster selected the Best Answer, and the thread is older than one year. The thread had not received any new replies for a long time, and had also seemed to run its course. If the response is in question, a new thread could easily be created to contest the findings of the original best answer. If established as running fact, the older thread could be updated by moderator. We're nothing if not agile here at Tom's.