Re: Do we ever want to freeze threads?

I don't want to freeze threads. I have found it very useful to go back to very old threads and provide new responses. New responses to old threads of mine have also been really nice.

Now, I can see wanting to freeze nodes after, say, a month. That should provide similar twiddling capabilities, right?

Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing.
Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid.
Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence.
Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.

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

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by talexb (Chancellor) on Dec 30, 2004 at 15:55 UTC
It's a really tough call .. Originally my thought was to prevent people from replying to a node that was a year or more old. But in addition I suppose it could also be used to prevent someone from modifying (or deleting, as per mt2k) an old node. Then again, updating is OK -- as in, adding something to the bottom. It's really not black and white, is it. Alex / talexb / Toronto "Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds	[reply]
Re^3: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by hardburn (Abbot) on Dec 30, 2004 at 16:03 UTC
What about the Thread Which Shall Not Be Named? "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]
Re^3: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Jul 28, 2023 at 08:31 UTC
> Originally my thought was to prevent people from replying to a node that was a year or more old Excellent thought talexb! Only last week a Perl newbie made a most unfortunate boo boo, making an ill-advised reply to a random old post instead of posting a new one. Sadly, perhaps feeling shamed by the opening blunder, our eager new Perl monk seems to have vanished, perhaps never to return. :-( Given that I wrote Necroposting Considered Beneficial (and how far you are behind in the race to Chancellor of the Exchequer :) I felt obliged to make a necropost response to your excellent (and deserving of an upvote!) discussion post of 2004. :)	[reply]
Re^4: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by talexb (Chancellor) on Jul 28, 2023 at 14:20 UTC
Yeah, this made me laugh out loud -- a 2004 discussion about freezing threads .. with an update almost twenty years later. :D Also interesting to note that just asking the question (my root node) garnered a significant number downvotes. :/ Well, everyone has their own opinion. Alex / talexb / Toronto Thanks PJ. We owe you so much. Groklaw -- RIP -- 2003 to 2013.	[reply]
Re^5: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Jul 28, 2023 at 23:19 UTC
Re^4: Do we ever want to freeze threads? by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 28, 2023 at 22:32 UTC
Only last week a Perl newbie made a most unfortunate boo boo, making an ill-advised reply to a random old post instead of posting a new one. tbh I'm a little disappointed that no one thought to consider it for promotion to root node. :-( Today's latest and greatest software contains tomorrow's zero day exploits.	[reply]