Occasionally (but it seems more frequent lately) I start reading a topic in View New Content because it seems new, only to realise, after a familiar name from the past pops up, that it was started several years ago and has just been resuscitated, often by a fairly new contributor.  Would it be possible to indicate prominently that a topic is old (say over a year) either at the start or by the title?

Edited February 21Feb 21 by Mac of Cygnet

Surely if the comment appears in the 'view new content' thread', then that content is, indeed, new, even if the original thread is not. That's how every new post appears in this category isn't it? Anyway,the date is clearly visible at the top of the page. They are on a web browser anyway. It may be different on a phone.

 

Maybe I am missing something.

Edited February 21Feb 21 by Russ T

Other forums I am on lock topics after 3-6 months of no activity. One technical one, if the question has been answered, will lock them as little as 14days after the last reply.

 

To me that's the way forward threads locked once they are dormant.

3 hours ago, Russ T said:

Surely if the comment appears in the 'view new content' thread', then that content is, indeed, new, even if the original thread is not. That's how every new post appears in this category isn't it? Anyway,the date is clearly visible at the top of the page. They are on a web browser anyway. It may be different on a phone.

 

Maybe I am missing something.

You are quite correct on both counts, but if I see a topic I may find interesting, and click on it, it takes me to the OP and I start reading, only to find after say a page that it's several years old.  Yes. the OP has a date on it, but this old fart needs a prod to take notice.  

I wouldn't go as far as Gumpy's suggestion, though.

6 minutes ago, Mac of Cygnet said:

You are quite correct on both counts, but if I see a topic I may find interesting, and click on it, it takes me to the OP and I start reading, only to find after say a page that it's several years old.  Yes. the OP has a date on it, but this old fart needs a prod to take notice.  

I wouldn't go as far as Gumpy's suggestion, though.

You can change settings so it goes to latest unread post rather than the thread start.

That's what mine does but I find that sometimes I have to go back as there is no clue as to what the OP posted at the start.

I can't see any point in regurgitating old threads over a year or even six months after the last post.

4 hours ago, GUMPY said:

You can change settings so it goes to latest unread post rather than the thread start.

That's what mine does but I find that sometimes I have to go back as there is no clue as to what the OP posted at the start.

I can't see any point in regurgitating old threads over a year or even six months after the last post.

Yes, I know that clicking on the dot takes me to latest unread, but often that still takes me to a point several years old, which is just as bad.

I agree that bringing up old posts is pointless  less than convenient.  but we have to remember that often new posters arrive here after a search on what they want, without realising that results may be ancient.  This seems to be the  main source of very old topics appearing.

5 hours ago, GUMPY said:

You can change settings so it goes to latest unread post rather than the thread start.

That's what mine does but I find that sometimes I have to go back as there is no clue as to what the OP posted at the start.

I can't see any point in regurgitating old threads over a year or even six months after the last post.

I can think of quite a few times where threads benefit from being regurgitated- quite a few on the historic section are well worth restarting, sometimes former employees family friends find a thread and restart it. Then there’s happenings (or not) that aren’t finished and need occasional adds to (Toddbrook/ Bridgwater etc. then there’s threads such as a particular engine problem part scumbling question navigation issue etc etc that’s far better restarting rather than starting a new thread with the same advise regurgitated (or argued about) 

The best is if a threads on several pages check when it started. Some threads eg historic boat sales or waterway photos have happily gone for  years, it would be a loss to have to keep restarting a new thread on these. 
 

 

 

9 hours ago, Stroudwater1 said:

The best is if a threads on several pages check when it started. Some threads eg historic boat sales or waterway photos have happily gone for  years, it would be a loss to have to keep restarting a new thread on these. 

But you wouldn't have to as there is never that long between posts.

I'm not suggesting locking stuff that's old just stuff that has had no activity for 12 months.

A very different thing.

I must emphasise that I have no objection to people posting on old topics; I would just like a more obvious heads-up that a topic is old, ideally before I click on it. Otherwise often the first I realise is on encountering a name who departed years ago (either from the Forum or from life).

Am I the only one who is pleasantly surprised when an ancient thread is revived and names from the past stir memories?

 

Surely killing off old threads would also spoil the fun of those who advocate using the search facility rather than starting a new topic...

3 hours ago, GUMPY said:

But you wouldn't have to as there is never that long between posts.

I'm not suggesting locking stuff that's old just stuff that has had no activity for 12 months.

A very different thing.

 

A typical one would be the RIP Sam Horne thread. Resurrected after 11 years and it’s not clear but possibly allowed Tonka to get in touch with the OP. A PM may have done it but the message is different and the OP may have considered a private PM some sort of scam compared to an open post on the forum.

 

It’s a good idea to post thread resurrection but that won’t help some who are  looking at the start of the thread. 

It makes me smile to see the old names again, I don't honestly see rhe problem or am I missing something?

On 21/02/2026 at 14:05, GUMPY said:

Other forums I am on lock topics after 3-6 months of no activity. One technical one, if the question has been answered, will lock them as little as 14days after the last reply.

 

To me that's the way forward threads locked once they are dormant.

 

We can do that in the new version of Invision, but not so easily on the version we're running currently. 

59 minutes ago, rmo said:

We can do that in the new version of Invision, but not so easily on the version we're running currently. 

Please no.

Another non-supporter.

 

Thread necromancy can be a great thing- who would want to re-start such useful threads  as the various lithium batteries, or numerous history and heritage threads, when they are already there?

. . . and another non-supporter, especially as new posters are often reprimanded for posting a new topic instead of using the site search to find the answer to their question.

I rather like it when I see posts from people I'd liked/admired pop up again. I must admit there's a moment when I think wow he/she is posting again and the disappointment when I look at the date. On balance I'll take saying hello to them again.

Plus of course the "use the search facility" oft used. I've never liked that because new members come aboard all the time with new knowledge. 

 

But there's a wealth of knowledge that's great to refer to. I'd be sad if that was locked.

My vote is to stay as we are.

Apologies, I replied/quoted the wrong post.

 

In v5, we will have the ability to put up a small banner to notify users that the topic is older than X months/years old. There is no intention to automatically lock them however.