- Time of past OR future Camino
- Annually - often more - from 2014
For 2024 Pilgrims: €50,- donation = 1 year with no ads on the forum + 90% off any 2024 Guide. More here. (Discount code sent to you by Private Message after your donation) |
---|
How do you know that there's been no activity. Some people observe, lurch and participate when their ready they may or may not express through words plus can't see problem with posts being resurrected, its healthy for a forum to keep everything on the tableMight the moderators give thought to potentially automatically locking a thread after - for example - two years of no activity?
How do you know that there's been no activity. Some people observe, lurch and participate when their ready they may or may not express through words plus can't see problem with posts being resurrected, its healthy for a forum to keep everything on the table
When this new feature (old threads are listed at the bottom of the screen that may or may not be related to the topic of the currently open thread) appeared on the forum for the first time after a forum software update there were not enough people who said that they didn't like it that forum members can still comment on them and thereby revive them, see for example https://www.caminodesantiago.me/community/threads/new-forum-setup-old-threads.53285/. There are gold nuggets in them old threads.Might the moderators give thought to potentially automatically locking a thread after - for example - two years of no activity? The huge benefit if this forum - for me - is the current and contemporary comment.
I would guess that 20% of ops provide 80% of content so majority are inactive, actively participatingFair point.
I didn’t consider threads being viewed without eliciting a reply.
Greetings all,
I have been here for over a year watching your posts and dreaming of walking. On Sept 24, 2019 I will begin at SJPP. I come among you all as the beneficiary of your rich experience that you have so kindly shared. Thank you.
I think Kathar1na suggested the cause of the issue - it’s the automatic suggestion of older threads which prompts a resurrection by those who - unlike DaveBugg - don’t check the date often enough.And as if by magic a new first time post appeared in another thread...
I guess I'm in the minority here, but sometimes old threads have a lot of useful information, and adding to the bottom of an old thread minimizes duplication and proliferation of threads about topics that reappear again and again.There are gold nuggets in them old threads.
. . . it’s the automatic suggestion of older threads which prompts a resurrection by those who - unlike DaveBugg - don’t check the date often enough.
I am not convinced this is a good idea. While it doesn't occur often, I am occasionally prompted to reflect on views that I expressed several years ago, such as in this thread from 2011.Might the moderators give thought to potentially automatically locking a thread after - for example - two years of no activity? The huge benefit if this forum - for me - is the current and contemporary comment.
I suspect others appreciate this opportunity too. If these threads were locked, we would no longer have such a direct link that presents the development of forum members' thinking on certain issues as their experience and understanding grows.@danielle aird quoted a post of mine from 2011 a little earlier, and it made me wonder whether my views on this had changed in the intervening time, and why.
I still fail to be convinced but this is just an expression of my opinion and preferences if asked. It's not meant as criticism.I guess I'm in the minority here, but sometimes old threads have a lot of useful information, and adding to the bottom of an old thread minimizes duplication and proliferation of threads about topics that reappear again
I still fail to be convinced but this is just an expression of my opinion and preferences if asked. It's not meant as criticism.
I think on the whole the revived old threads do nothing more than duplicate and triplicate and n-cate what's also in more recent threads and even in the current thread that led to their revival by a casual reader. What this forum doesn't have, in contrast to other forums of the same age (15 years!) are decent well maintained FAQs. Again, just an observation, not meant as criticism.
People obviously like to share and share and share again. They advice a poster who posted their question 9 years ago and hasn't been on the forum for 8 but the advice can be of course useful for newcomers who've not yet read the dozens of other threads with the same advice.
@ivar ?decent well maintained FAQs
Not sure if I count as a veteran member. But I am well aware that I lose patience very easily with a lot of these questions which are repeated time after time after time.... Not sure that a FAQ section would be a huge help in reducing them though - if someone is unable or unwilling to use the search facility before posting their question would they be any more likely to seek out the FAQs? But grumpy or dismissive replies are not helpful so I usually leave it to some more tolerant and generous person to answer rather than risk a slap on the wrist from the moderators for publishing my unspoken/unwritten initial responsea little patience from veteran members is all that's required.
There is a whole section on Frequently Asked Questions with the most frequently asked ones pinned to the top. There are also a lot of resources which help provide advice on pack lists, alburgues etc. Wayfarer has a point in that often the answers to questions do change overtime and updating FAQs can be a humongous task. In the last forum redesign the Older Thread section was added to help new users find related information, yes it has lead to reactivating some old threads but it's not the end of the world when that happens.@ivar ?
This is a brilliant idea. Even if it's only to direct people to the appropriate and current threads.
Let's face it: one of the functions of this forum is that it's a talking shop. People want to talk. One has to tune out if one doesn't want to listen to some or all of the talk.
Threads are numbered and the number shows up at the end of the URL to the start of the thread. For example, the URL of this thread (with the lead removed so it doesn't get automatically converted to a live link) is:As far as old threads are concerned, what I miss is the option to select threads from a certain period of time in the past, for example all the threads of the year 2005.
Most definitely a veteran member Brady.Not sure if I count as a veteran member.
Rick, you are so smart! I love it...Threads are numbered and the number shows up at the end of the URL to the start of the thread. For example, the URL of this thread (with the lead removed so it doesn't get automatically converted to a live link) is:
community/threads/resurrection-of-old-threads.64420/
But did you know that you only need the number in last portion of the URL. This will bring you to the same page as the one above:
community/threads/64420/
So you can have fun visiting old threads by randomly picking a number:
I've read quite a few old threads but it's awkward to get to them in a convenient and systematic way. What I mean is that it is possible to select threads newer than a specific date but not threads older than a specific date or threads between two specific dates. The advanced search option lacks these two functions.Threads are numbered and the number shows up at the end of the URL to the start of the thread. For example, the URL of this thread (with the lead removed so it doesn't get automatically converted to a live link) is:
community/threads/resurrection-of-old-threads.64420/
Believe me I get it. I filter out such things using Eyeball Mark One, and Finger Brake v 2.
Ha! Maybe. Except for those of us who dismiss The Way, and who won't go near FB if you paid us.Direct info from people on "The Way" and responses to requests for immediate help have moved to Facebook groups.
There are some questions that FAQ's can never answer, bringing poles in hand luggage is one of them IMO because in many cases it all depends on who you meet on the day at airport security, I have seen some people refused and ten minutes later someone else get through with them.
On this I would agree because basically it is a case of showing up with your poles and taking a chance on getting them on board. I always bite the bullet, pay the €20 extra and check my bag in, poles and all, the other obvious thing to do is buy a set at your staging point.The ‘poles’ example was just that - an example - but I would maintain that there is a simple cogent answer:
1.These are the published rules with respect to poles in hand luggage ...
2.The rules are sometimes not enforced consistently.
Surely that’s more helpful than a random collection of posters setting out their personal experience and maintaining that there is a definitive answer or recommending their patented solution to beating the system?
I know my previous post didn't actually help too much with your specific question but I did think it was somewhat useful. I also meant to post my tip sometime and your post gave me a prompt to send it in.I've read quite a few old threads but it's awkward to get to them in a convenient and systematic way. What I mean is that it is possible to select threads newer than a specific date but not threads older than a specific date or threads between two specific dates. The advanced search option lacks these two functions.
View attachment 64690
Actually I don't think that answer IS more helpful. I prefer to understand the background, details and subtleties of a problem. This illustrates exactly why there is often not a "simple cogent answer" that is useful.
Here, you have taken my statements and stripped them of the intended nuances and qualifiers, in order to make a generalized half truth. Why? Is that helpful to anyone else?
I presume that you intended some humour, but internet communication is famously bad at clever humour.
I totaly agree on the subject of poles as carry on luggage, when will people start to adhere to rules and regulationsI’m amongst the first to moan when I think that current threads are being closed just because they’ve got a bit lively.
I have another thought.
I’ve seen a couple of threads being brought back from the dead recently when they might have been dormant for a couple of years, or more.
Might the moderators give thought to potentially automatically locking a thread after - for example - two years of no activity? The huge benefit if this forum - for me - is the current and contemporary comment.
I have a further thought which I’ll develop further to discourage the new post every week about poles in carry-on bags.
Here's the link to a standard forum note with detailed information on this controversial evergreen topic, posted by forum moderators at least 9 times within the last 2 years.I totaly agree on the subject of poles as carry on luggage, when will people start to adhere to rules and regulations
They won't. I suspect we are all scofflaws at some point or other, and contravene some law, bylaw or other regulation, perhaps by design but equally possibly by oversight. I have a parking ticket on my desk that proves I parked incorrectly recently, so I am not suggesting that I am any different to anyone else.I totaly agree on the subject of poles as carry on luggage, when will people start to adhere to rules and regulations
Really nice to dig with the thread number, the smaller one I was able to catch is number 3:
https://www.caminodesantiago.me/community/threads/hostal-suso.3/
I leave it to you, old "veterans", the pleasure to discover who was already writing in this prehistoric times...
Another particularly savourous one is number 9...
"Hut ab" Ivar to have kept the forum alive and lively to now!
Buen Camino, Jacques-D.
Perhaps not in this life. But in a previous life....How about combining several old closed threads into one to save time? For example:
Shirley MacLaine: is she a "true" pilgrim if she started in SJPP, used TSA approved hiking poles, but had her luggage forwarded and did not speak any Spanish?
Discuss amongst yourselves.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?