Alternative suggestions can be posted in the comments, but the only immediately-available options have to deal with increasing/decreasing (or not changing at all) the auto-lock timer. Anything else would either require me developing a plugin just for the SDG Forum, waiting for someone to develop a relevant plugin, or waiting for Discourse to implement features that would accommodate the suggestions.
For example – there’s been suggestions to let OP set their own auto-lock timer, or to close their own post. The latter would never be implemented by Discourse because of how it impacts discussion (it’d be like letting users delete any comments on their own topic). The former just isn’t possible with Discourse as it is currently.
Skydragonfire’s suggestion could probably be done with a plugin and some CSS/js theme changes, but that’s only if Discourse allows auto-locks to be triggered via plugin hooks. If not, then a bot with admin privileges would have to be made, and it’d be the one performing the auto-locks based on the votes (which could probably just be done with a theme component and then the bot, at that point).
I haven’t voted / mentioned it publicly yet because I haven’t wanted to sway public opinion on the poll, especially so early. But I think it’s important to be able to maintain healthy discussions for as long as possible, while still being able to compromise on demands to crack down on spam via using auto-locks. I don’t think I’d personally vote to increase to 6 months, nor remove the timer so suddenly either, but based on the original suggestions and the more modern feedback I do think there’s likely soom room for improvement and that might be partially through adjusting the auto-lock timer (hence the poll).
I think people will have different opinions based on how much spam they acknowledge.
Technically an option too, is to have the auto-lock less dynamic by having it based on when the topic is made, rather than having it start based on when the last post is made. For example, the auto-lock is 6 months but it doesn’t ever reset (active discussion wouldn’t make it close any sooner or later).
I think this would appeal to some people, as you could have a long timer but the lack of being able to “bump” the timer and reset it would keep it consistent.
I am going to look at the poll not only based on each option, but also based on the general ideas of:
- Shorter timer, same timer, or longer timer.
- Whether or not people want a timer at all (looking at upper-echelon of times, and no timer).
Users have multiple votes so that they can more accurately display their flexibility, and it helps better reflect people’s opinions on whether or not they want a timer to begin with. Obviously “no timer” is a pretty direct indication of not wanting a timer, but being able to show flexibility is useful for when trying to decide how to handle the pull results.