introducing a time limit for what classifies a thread as 'old'?

[Esphas]

there was another thread that was locked because, even though it posed a good point, the mod who closed it only saw it for what the thread was based upon and not the underlying message
a thread was locked for being posted on a month old yesterday

and regardless of the context, its impossible to know what classifies as an old thread
when i questioned justin

whats considered an old thread, as in one thats still relevant and that youre allowed to post on (not just bump)?

he stated that

That's generally up to moderator discretion in the moment. Depends on the thread.

this seems really odd to me, because the classification of old shouldnt be subjective when it comes to a forum rule, because then mods can close threads for no reason as they please, which will just lead to more thread spam, cluttering up the cafe and wherever else

 

[seliph]

(Why was that thread locked when there were so many good points in it, none of which were addressed lmao)

 

[That Zephyr Guy]

If a thread was bumped solely so a user could increase their post count, but people started making good posts in it, then maybe warn the user alone and not punish everyone else by locking the thread. Please establish a time limit so this doesn't happen again.

 

[seliph]

If a thread was bumped solely so a user could increase their post count, but people started making good posts in it, then maybe warn the user alone and not punish everyone else by locking the thread. Please establish a time limit so this doesn't happen again.

Also don't lock threads or warn people for baseless assumptions.
Considering we're still talking about the same thread, that dude just seemed like he wanted to find another Imagine Dragons fan. I mean sure they're a horrible band but don't punish the dude because you think he's spamming.

 

[Chris]

The thread was locked meaning that the discussion was over. You don't just get to overrule a staff decision by creating a new one.