Plenty of other places have auto-locking, but reviving old threads isn't always 100% a bad thing. As long as the post is relevant and provides more information (timely information, in the case of solving problems), then it's not something we frown upon. It's kind of silly to say something like "Hey, you're 6 months too late, what you want to add to this discussion is irrelevant, end of story" which is why necroposting is handled manually now, so Forum Staff can make the call.
To be clear, what we don't like are people that post from 2009-era threads asking for help. Certainly, threads 2+ years old are perfect targets for mass lockdown, but I can see where a number of exceptions should apply even if we stick to a hard date. Again, bumping an old thread has to be meaningful in some way.
I think we need to gauge whether or not it's a frequent enough problem that needs to be addressed with such a broad measure. How many cases of necroposting do we really handle? Consider that clueless users would just make new threads to do their, for lack of a better word, shitposting. We'll always have to deal with these kinds of people online in some way. That's just my dos centavos.
To be clear, what we don't like are people that post from 2009-era threads asking for help. Certainly, threads 2+ years old are perfect targets for mass lockdown, but I can see where a number of exceptions should apply even if we stick to a hard date. Again, bumping an old thread has to be meaningful in some way.
I think we need to gauge whether or not it's a frequent enough problem that needs to be addressed with such a broad measure. How many cases of necroposting do we really handle? Consider that clueless users would just make new threads to do their, for lack of a better word, shitposting. We'll always have to deal with these kinds of people online in some way. That's just my dos centavos.