Re^2: Do we ever want to freeze threads?

This is a very bad idea!

Sure, sure. My question (from almost twenty years ago) was not seriously about freezing threads, but perhaps flagging them to make it clear that the thread was old. And it's ironic that we're discussing this on a question I posted .. in 2004.

Alex / talexb / Toronto

Thanks PJ. We owe you so much. Groklaw -- RIP -- 2003 to 2013.

Comment on Re^2: Do we ever want to freeze threads?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by harangzsolt33 (Deacon) on Jul 29, 2023 at 22:50 UTC
Yes, it is ironic! Lol I think, maybe if the date of the post was written with red if the thead is over a year old would help avoid this type of mistake. I really thought I'm responding to a current discussion. And it's not the first I have been tricked into responding. Lol Last time I started arguing with someone whose post was about 20 years old. That was hilarious.	[reply]
Re^4: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by cavac (Prior) on Jul 31, 2023 at 09:43 UTC
What is even more astonishing: You talked on a 20 year old thread and the OP was still available and using their original account. But that's PerlMonks. It's just a matter of time until paco returns to continue discussing his original question. PerlMonks XP is useless? Not anymore: XPD - Do more with your PerlMonks XP	[reply]
Re^5: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Jul 31, 2023 at 10:42 UTC
It's just a matter of time until paco returns to continue discussing his original question Yes, the legendary paco was with us for just sixty four minutes, yet achieved more here in those sixty four minutes than most of us do in a lifetime. His profound original question has received more upvotes than any other node in 24 years of Perl Monks history. Like many others, I patiently await his return. More detail at: The First Ten Perl Monks	[reply]