Just so you know, greifers: those who continuously make a TRS for the same issue and won't let it go, get banned.
Fight smart, not fair.Locking the huge threads, which are ones that tend to actually be threads where big projects are going on when they get big is a sure way to make sure that no big or complex projects ever get handled because we'd basically kill them all when they were making progress. It's one thing to lock them if they're hopelessly stuck, but if it's just a complex issue and it's making progress, we should let them keep going.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickSome of my ideas:
An archive to seperate the locked and open threads is a good idea. I suggested something like this some time ago, when we discussed the IP backlog. It wont solve the stack problem, but it will help a bit.
An other idea to solve the stack problem is simply increasing the amount of threads displayed on each page of the list.
Restricting the number of open threads is a bad idea, when something is broken we shouldend discourage people trying to fix it. Maybe we can add a massage to the thread creating sheet saying something like : "At the moment there are x open discussions, please think twice whether your problem needs immediate attantion." This message will be displayed after we reached a certain amount of open threads.
An other helpful point would be something like a thread for small fixes which don't need much discussion e.g. formatting issus and other technical stuff.
Autobumping a thread after a certain time of inactivity sounds like a good idea, but we will have to see how all this old threads popping up on the first page will affect the ongoing discussions.
We have a lot of really old threads which are open for more than half a year maybe we can add a function that a thread after reaching a certain age (200 days?) will automatically be bumped with a massage: "This thread is 200 days old, please focus on resolving it" these very old threads should be specially marked on the discussion list, maybe by using a red or bold font. If there is still no result or healthy discussion after a certain amount of time (30 days?) then this thread can be locked. I know the problem will still be unresolved, but on the other hand, a dead thread wont solve the problem either.
That won't solve anything at all. It will just make it look different. The problem isn't the number of pages of open threads, it's the number of open threads. Renumbering the pages won't fix that.
Thread Hop: I've been considering proposing a Special Effort to go through the stale threads and clear out low hanging fruit - for example, crowner run but solution not implimented, solution implemented but thread never locked, question raised but not anything to actually fix, etc. Me considering it and me having the time/energy to participate in it are two different things of course...
Do the forums support a watchlist/todo system like is already implemented in normal wiki articles? So that individual users can flag the threads they are involved in. And maybe have a button that lists forum threads with the most users watching it.
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.For STUCK debates, get a crowner. If two sides are stuck in a circular argument, then this will show which of the two sides is consensual and which is the vocal minority. If necessary, lock the thread once it starts repeating itself, and keep the crowner open.
All crowners should be closed after one week, both to speed things up and to avoid meta-arguments about when a crowner should close.
The three longest threads that have an open crowner should have this crowner displayed prominently outside the TRS forum, to get more participants in. The three long threads are likely the most controversial debates, and these benefit from getting more fresh voices in.
The problem with STACK is throughput. Resolving STUCK and INERTIA strikes me as the best way to deal with STACK.
Has anybody suggested yet that the repair shop threads have a sense of "on-topic"? If someone comes in with a problem like "hmm, this description needs fixing up" or "let's farm some redirects", keep it to that, because plenty of times it feels like people just throw "let's rename" out there and nobody really has any passion for it so it's less likely than the rename will be resolved and next to no chance that the original issue would be resolved.
God no, so many threads have started with one solution and ended with another because the OP was trying to fix the wrong thing.
Fight smart, not fair.Some drift is allowed. If someone makes a thread "rename <blah> and the discussion determines that the name isn't the problem, but the definition needs to be made clearer, there's no good reason to close that thread and make a new one named "Clarify description <blah>", when the thread can be renamed.
forgive me again, but what separates them? I mean how do they all differ? For example, the image pickin one, isn't it just a multi-prop to rank suggest replacements or suggested images?
As far as the TRS is concerned though, just a way to tell if a crowner has changed from a single prop (rename y/n) to multi-prop (which name shall we now use) would really help.
edited 16th Aug '11 3:36:21 PM by CrypticMirror
They work the same way for the most part. What varies is the locked in introductory text. What's really important is that they're stored in the crowner index by type. And that you can use the exact same name for crowners of two different types, but not for two crowners of the same type.
edited 16th Aug '11 3:38:44 PM by Madrugada
ah right, thank you for your patience explaining that there. I was separating them by effect rather than starting point. Sorry.
I still say that for TRS purposes being able to tell at-a-glance from the TRS index the different type of crowner attached to a thread would be a great help in keeping track of progress on a subject. Possibly it might be the same for image pickin', I'll let someone who uses that part of the site chime in on that though.

^ Use the Holler Button on those. Ask for a lock and explain why.