Locking Threads?

[Dividend Watcher]

A couple other boards I belong to lock threads that are over xx days old.

The theory is that the original topic has been beat to death and most new posts were the "me too" type rather than adding substance to the topic.

It also gets cumbersome to wade through more than 5 pages of posts and maintain the thought process to specifically answer the original post. The KO thread seems to be trending that way. If someone wants to continue the topic (which usually is an offshoot of the original post), a new thread is started.

Some posts are kept open intentionally, such as introductions or other mundane topics, to allow some to build up post counts or because there is no timeliness to the subject such as photos of your cat, etc.

So, my thinking is wouldn't it be wise to limit the time a thread is open here? A cogent discussion on a company can only go so long before the next quarterly earnings report or significant news appears possibly changing the dynamics of the company.

Similarly, a question on portfolios can only go so long before either something is acted upon or the status quo remains until something goads you into a different action. Asking about the short-term effects of GE's dividend cut in the same thread two years after it happened doesn't add anything to the original post, IMO. Discussing what really occurred over those 2 years and looking forward would be more appropriate in a new thread.

Just thinking out loud here. Wondering about Kerim's thoughts (since he's the Big Kahuna) and others.

[Kerim]

I generally agree with you, DW. A while back I started a separate thread about a stock that already had a thread, and a couple of people didn't like it, saying that it was confusing, so I consolidated them. At that time, though, the forum was a bit younger and less active. When there were just a few of us posting, it maybe was silly to have several PM threads.

But as things get more active (yay!), my feeling is that new threads are appropriate. When a company issues a new earnings report or a dividend raise, or when someone has a question about a company, I don't think they should feel expected to search around for the "official" thread for that company and post at the end. A new topic with a descriptive title is the better way to go.

At the same time, I also don't mind when a thread evolves away from its original topic. It is natural, I think, and just reflects the same way an in-person conversation might evolve. If it is a really juicy topic, I think it makes sense for someone to start a new thread and point folks to the new discussion (I've seen you do this nicely at least a couple of times), but I personally wouldn't be a stickler about it.

My instinct is not to impose any specific rules at this point, but to encourage people not to be shy about starting new threads as they see fit (and not feeling obligated to stay in an "official" thread for a company). If after some more time, the threads really start to get unwieldy, we can always revisit the question. But if folks want a more stringent approach, I'm all ears.

What do others think?