-21

Since many sites are already in puberty, they should have the right to forget the indiscretions of youth and be done with it.

Permanently locking old posts usually means framing garbage, preventing future users from properly moderating these posts with fresh look and with foreknowledge about the future that past users can't phantom about. The oldest locked post on the network is probably bobince Zalgo. While that answer is still valid, the most compelling reason for the lock is that moderators got tired of flags. That's... not a good reason to lock a post indefinitely. Right now... I would argue that that answer is basically rude, since it wastes readers time unnecessarily instead of giving sound advice (which is the footnote of the answer). The more recent examples are more in line of "popular and old" and in some cases neither.

There's a deleted answer that moderators should be very careful when weighting their options and prefer edit or deletion over locking on most cases but it seems that the banner that would do that was never implemented. So, we are here, forever forced to remember our previous indiscretions and without say (votes) that would actually make our opinions about the matter known.

1
  • 4
    You are right that direct moderation through votes is no longer possible. But these posts can still be flagged for moderator attention. I understand that when it comes to a historical lock mods will be very hessistant to acting on those flags, but if there is something really wrong there is a way. A second route would be to start a discussion on a site's meta, as to wether or not a certain locked post still has a place on the site.
    – Luuklag
    Nov 11 at 13:10
22

Well - even where permanent, we can always revisit decisions via meta or flags.

Historic locks are an interesting thing. The bobince Zalgo, while I'd agree is not in line with current standards for the network, is a piece of internet and network folklore. If memory serves, the lock there was due to people trying to 'fix' it. I suspect that were the lock to be lifted, we would encounter the issue again.

We ought to trust our moderators to use these tools appropriately (we don't have to permalock things) and where there's a compelling reason that this tool is not the right tool, to make a case on the individual level.

In this specific case

While that answer is still valid, the most compelling reason for the lock is that moderators got tired of flags

I suspect the mods were tired of edits.

That's... not a good reason to lock a post indefinitely

Saving time and moderator resources on problems that are mostly intractable otherwise? Sounds like a great reason.

Right now... I would argue that that answer is basically rude, since it wastes readers time unnecessarily instead of giving sound advice (which is the footnote of the answer)

You just told us it was valid. In this case, you might advocate a deletion as opposed to a lock, which also fundamentally prevents changes to the post, and hide it

The more recent examples are more in line of "popular and old" and in some cases neither.

I mean the lock reason for historical locks reads

Lock this post if it’s off-topic but has historical significance.

This seems in line with what the intended and labelled usage of a historical lock is.

We have these locks because they've proven useful or needed in the past. As a moderator, even when I'm not currently inclined to remove a specific lock, if you really can make an argument for it, we'll listen.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .