Is there a technical reason for why the threads are locked so soon, requiring new threads to be opened if the conversation [about the topic] hasn't ended yet? Having operated a forum soon for 15 years it is my experience that premature locking of threads tends to fragment conversation and sometimes stunt discussion on a particular topic by increasing the threshold for new comments after a thread has been locked: a comment that might be insightful might not feel sufficiently important for the user to open another thread, and so it never gets posted.

Just wondering.. I'm sure there's a good reason for it, but I've only been here few weeks so if there's a historical reason for it, I haven't been around to see it.

Not in the know - but reasoned it may have to do with sheer volume.
Looking at the 'traffic' here, RfM is the most active of any 'specialty' forum have participated in.
Much more than professional/avocation forums.

Vastly more active than any of the 'proper' Mormon forums.
Lots more fun, and much more illuminating as well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2014 11:11AM by zenjamin.

30 replies average makes the threads easier to read and comb through. That's why.

Long threads tend to degenerate into private wars.
Band width is important here. The whole setup is designed for ease of use by older systems.
It makes the board easier to moderate. This place is (well) run on a shoestring.

If a thread closes, you are allowed to open a new thread on the subject. It's just a way to keep them from going off subject. Occasionally, if there is a hot topic, the mods will let it go on.