7 Replies Latest reply: Jan 23, 2014 1:42 PM by Dude! RSS

    Current forum archiving policy


      What is the current archiving policy please? It seem like posts older than 3 month or so are being archived.


      Unfortunately it is not possible to reply to or edit such posts. Some of the info, which is still valid, was messed up during the last forum upgrade, for instance, pre, code and other tags were not converted properly.


      If I find there is a need to correct any of these posts that were archived, can I ask a forum moderator to somehow unlock the post, or is the archived thread practically read-only for good?

        • 1. Re: Current forum archiving policy

          As far as I am aware, the current site setting is to have a thread automatically archived after 120 days of inactivity.


          Moderators have no permissions to modify the Archive status on a per-thread basis.

          I don't even know if an Administrator can `release` a thread on an individual basis, either.


          As for the archived posts that aren't particularly readable any more, my guess is that we're stuck with how they are and you'll just have to create fresh versions of them.

          • 2. Re: Current forum archiving policy

            I guess the inactivity bit is the tricky part. Personally I wish threads could remain active much longer, like 2 years, but I guess it is what it is. Recreating is probably the best solution in some cases anyway. Thanks for the prompt response!

            • 3. Re: Current forum archiving policy

              I think threads should be open until the version they refer to is no longer in the wild.  For Oracle rdbms, I know there are V7.3's, and assume there are older.


              Perhaps "reopen-able with a simple process" would be good enough.


              At minimum, the rules and justification for auto-closing should be public.

              • 4. Re: Current forum archiving policy

                Well, doing it based on the version of oracle referred to, would be pretty hard to implement technically.... especially if someone keeps coming onto the thread and mentioning something like "It's a shame you don't have 12c otherwise it would be easier".  It has to be technically based on the last activity of the thread.   I can see why some may think 120 days isn't enough, but then these forums are so active with new questions appearing all the time, that if a discussion hasn't been active for 120 days then it's a fair assumption that people have finished with it in the main sense of it needing to be discussed.  Obviously that causes problems if anyone does want to go back and edit something etc. but I guess there's got to be a line somehere and 120 days isn't unreasonable.



                Moderators have no permissions to modify the Archive status on a per-thread basis.

                I don't even know if an Administrator can `release` a thread on an individual basis, either.


                According to the Jive website/documentation, individual archived threads can be marked to un-archive them and prevent them being archived, but this has to be done by the Admin, it's certainly not something we moderators can do.


                In terms of editing an archived post, I've just had a go at editing the SQL and PL/SQL FAQ, which is archived, and I was able to do that ok, so I guess moderators do have that ability; in which case if someone has posted something that needs removing etc. (private information or suchlike) in an thread that has become archived, then people could request a moderator to edit it for them (of course there would have to be a justified reason for such edits as the moderators are not going to have time to just edit things for no good reason).

                • 5. Re: Current forum archiving policy

                  Being  sarcastic I would question what the forum upgrade was all about if it cannot perform or store information as well as the previous version. But I guess we all know that upgrading for performance reason is typically a myth with any IT software product. I would not know the criteria that would make 120 days or whatever time period reasonable, but it’s better than 1 week for instance.

                  • 6. Re: Current forum archiving policy

                    Who said the forum was unable to perform or store information as well as the previous version?


                    One of the reasons for archiving is to help prevent older discussions from being resurrected unnecessary, as we were commonly getting, especially by some members who seemed to think it was their duty to return after 12 months and make all their own questions active again by posting "Thanks" on the end of them all.  120 days if inactivity (and that's the key, the discussion has to be inactive, not just created that long ago) is plenty of time to give a good indication that people have now moved onto one of the other more recent discussions.  And, if anyone does need to discuss something from an older archived thread, they can start a new discussion and reference it easy enough.


                    Certainly 1 week would be unreasonable, as someone may ask for some help and then go off on their holidays or sick for a while.  120 days should be plenty of time.... it allows for what Oracle have obviously deemed to be reasonable plus some I would guess.

                    • 7. Re: Current forum archiving policy

                      Right. I was only under the impression the policy was added since Jive Genius, etc. started to pull out information from 2004 causing a performance issue. But I might be mixing things up. Meanwhile I also found some of the older threads explaining the archiving policy by the admin. I simply forgot.


                      Re: Resurrect an archived discussion?

                      Proper way to handle people raising dead threads?


                      I guess if anyone needs to respond or add to a thread that has been archived it would be sufficient to create a new thread with a reference. Why can the system not do this automatically? So I guess the problem is just really about being able to edit older content, or missing the obvious.


                      One of the first things I noticed after the forum upgrade was that editing a post does no longer reactivate it and move it to the top list of active threads, like it did previously.


                      It amazes me how primitive the system is and how much people try to work around it. For instance, why does the forum not simply provide a feature that allows the owner to edit a post, but prohibit any further replies? Well, I guess considering also other issues, the Jive developers seem generally not very experienced or perhaps their usual target is not very demanding, not like the OTN community.