Comms Thread Pruning

Just a quick question to the administration.

When DDH was modding the Comms forum, the number of threads was maintained at around 490-ish. It seemed like manual thread pruning, as opposed to server pruning.

Since DDH stopped modding Comms and moved to the greener pastures of the CT forum, the number of threads has grown to 590-ish and is growing daily. I would imagine that there is no more manual pruning, and it is all being left up to the server to prune when it wants.

Recently, however, the Games forum has seen the evil side of server pruning, losing its FAQ.

Given there are some classic Comms threads that would be a tragedy to lose, will the current Comms mods be reverting to manual pruning here, or are they going to continue the laissez-faire pruning, and let the server prune as it pleases?

 

Personally, I think if you want to keep the classic threads, archive them.

Having all the threads around can often influence newer members opinions about someone, and more importanly, can be bumped for some reason. This creates people bringing the issue back up when 99% of the time it was better left off as dropped. It's often painful to see them for some people. Then the mods have to relock the threads, and people get bad opinions of them when they're really doing the best thing for the forum.

¤Night

 

"Personally, I think if you want to keep the classic threads, archive them."

That's a really bad attitude. We should try to avoid the deletion of worthwhile threads if at all possible. Anyway, the old threads in here are locked, so people won't be able to bring them up.

 

I agree entirely with you Jeff, I should have specified I only felt that that was required in Comms.

But, if I may draw from I, Jedi; leaving the threads around where people argued and opinions were discussed do violently often is like leaving a lightsaber around for a child. It's dangerous, people can be hurt and people can be prejudged. I wouldn't like it if someone judged me on an old post I made as opposed to someone of my newer ones, and I'm sure you wouldn't either. I'd prefer that the slate be wiped clean so the new members can see the moderators in a new light, instead of their old arguments. That way they can form their own opinions instead of having older member's opinions influencing them.

¤Night

 

When DDH was modding the Comms forum, the number of threads was maintained at around 490-ish. It seemed like manual thread pruning, as opposed to server pruning.

It wasn't anything particular I was doing. It may have come from the occaisional deletion of a pointless watse of thread, but even then only a couple every now and then. But there was no set manual pruning system in place.

I don't know if the forum as a whole is inthat big a danger of server pruning, the way say JCC would be, and most of the important info threads seem to get upped on a somewhat regular basis.

Is there a specific instance your seeing?

 

>> Recently, however, the Games forum has seen the evil side of server pruning, losing its FAQ.

Laugh it up, fuzzballs.

FWIW the Games FAQ is being reconstructed at present. Should be back online by the end of the week...



Sorry; Back on topic...

 

bigger and better than ever before?

there have been some memorable discussions in here, would be a pity to lose them, unless of course we want to repeat history every couple of months

 

DDH, nothing specific no. But there are some classic threads that I would hate to lose to some random server deletion, thats all.

Maybe you didnt have a certain level of threads that you maintained...but still, you did get rid of things rather than leaving it up to the server.

Its much better that way...more control.

But Night, I doubt someone would judge you by a post you made a year ago. People change, and everyone knows that.

 

If I remember correctly, server pruning was only supposed to be carried out in forums with more than 200,000 (or was it 400,000 posts)? Why is there server pruning in Communications (or even Games), for that matter?

 

Auto-pruning has been turned off in most of the major forums, including Communications. You won't have to worry about losing any old threads anytime soon.

 

All good then. Thanks SotS.

I guess this can be locked now.

EDIT: Although will there be any return to manual pruning?

 

Why not just delete the locked threads below page 3 or so?

 

In what little spare time I have found, I've been doing a little manual pruning here in Comms, along with Lit which I've always done. It's only 5-10 threads a day at most, but they're all the ones that were one-time questions, were locked, or will be brought up again, no matter how hard we try to get the info out.

 

I saw prune in the title of the thread so I thought there would be talk of dietary fiber benefits to men of over thirty?

Talk about a letdown.

 

maybe you could Pm interested parties about that ender? i am guessing that dagsy would be interested, and DDH has always been interested in being regula

 

reg·u·lar Pronunciation Key (rgy-lr)
adj.
1. Customary, usual, or normal: the train's regular schedule.
2. Orderly, even, or symmetrical: regular teeth.
3. In conformity with a fixed procedure, principle, or discipline.
4. Well-ordered; methodical: regular habits.
5. Occurring at fixed intervals; periodic: regular payments.
6.
a. Occurring with normal or healthy frequency.
b. Having bowel movements or menstrual periods with normal or healthy frequency.
7. Not varying; constant.
8. Formally correct; proper.
9. Having the required qualifications for an occupation: not a regular lawyer.
10. Informal. Complete; thorough: a regular scoundrel.
11. Informal. Good; nice: a regular guy.
12. Botany. Having symmetrically arranged parts of similar size and shape: regular flowers.
13. Grammar. Conforming to the usual pattern of inflection, derivation, or word formation.
14. Ecclesiastical. Belonging to a religious order and bound by its rules: the regular clergy.
15. Mathematics.
a.Having equal sides and equal angles. Used of polygons.
b.Having faces that are congruent regular polygons and congruent polyhedral angles. Used of polyhedrons.
16. Belonging to or constituting the permanent army of a nation.

n.
1. Ecclesiastical. A member of the clergy or of a religious order.
2. A soldier belonging to a regular army.
3. A dependable loyal person: one of the party regulars.
4. A clothing size designed for persons of average height.
5. A habitual customer.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English reguler, living under religious rule, from Old French, from Late Latin rgulris, according to rule, from Latin rgula, rod, rule. See reg- in Indo-European Roots.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
regu·lari·ty (-lr-t) n.
regu·lar·ly adv.


Speaking for myself, I think some manual pruning could occur in Communcations. Shouldn't be too much opf a problem.