That's what I was implying.

No limit would, if I know databases, create a lot of stress on the machines and increase load times for the thread.
You could just as well do that, sure.

This was the original reason for the lock. Modern forum software isn't affected by such limitation though which is the point since it was indeed updated recently.

I know of a very efficient forum with at least one 19500 page thread at 40 post per page for example

Possibly but I believe it may still hinder the time it takes to load a thread if it's having to pull back 10,000's of posts.
Like the Community Tech Thread, that's on it's 150th-ish thread so thats...200posts * 150threads = 30,000 posts all housed under the one thread. Might not be a lot of stress but some, and I like my threads as fast as I click my fingers..*sn..Sna..[censored] this*

I just said no, modern forum software isn't affected by that. There's no slowdown because the forum doesn't have to pull back 10000 of posts because it only needs to display 40 posts or so at a time.

Yeah I still can't understand it. No one reads all the posts in a thread, just like here no one reads the other threads. BUT, at least they're available. Everything gets purged here.

There have been some cases where I've read a whole thread on other forums, because it's THAT good. Usually the legendary threads everyone keeps talking about.

Here? No legendary threads.

Remember the Super Thread? The last 15 pages or so were spam. When a thread goes on for a long time it's almost guaranteed that it goes off-topic. They also become pains for mods to clean up.

Doesn't really happen in other forums. Not the ones with good moderators and members at least. Sure, some posts are off topic - just like here.

Anyway, my last post on this subject because nothing will change, so I'm wasting precious studying time.

You know it's not slowed how? 40 posts instead of 20 doubles the time, thereotically, for a page to load.
Really so you want pages but not the lock, when effectively the lock (If the thread is popular enough) is just one big page jump.

You are grasping at straws here. Either big threads (as in, threads with a LOT of posts) cause the forum software to slow down, or it doesn't. The number of posts displayed per page is an orthogonal issue here and is often configurable by the user himself anyway.

What I want is to stop the conversation flow breaking that happens each time the thread is locked. I want moderators to stop breaking the "Search in this Topic" feature of the forum and to stop breaking the ability to quote messages past the 200 posts boundary. I never said I wanted the forum to display each thread I open in a single page containing all the posts at once XD

But what is the use in complaining about it? Rules are rules. I don't own the forum so I see no reason in trying to change things.

Now that's kinda a defeatist attitude. Rules can be changed. Annoyances won't be brought up if people don't talk about them either.

But notice how it's new members who bring up the 200 post limit? You get used to it over time. In my opinion it keeps the forums looking clean instead of having 40 page threads of 50 page threads everywhere.

Although, it would be nice if they raised it to 300 posts so 10 page threads would be locked instead of 7 page ones.

Your definition of clean is weird to me. Having two threads on the same subject, one locked and the other no isn't clean Having a single thread where all that concerns that topic happens is clean.

The community discussion board is the one that needs infinite size threads the most. We got on first page :

NFL Thread #9 (currently locked)
Minecraft Thread #71
Mass Effect #44
My Little Pony: Threadship is Magic #28
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning (thread the second)
Unofficial Star Wars: The Old Republic Thread (that will soon spawn his first child thread, it's at 7 pages)

That out of 22 non sticky threads.

What does a new member does when he comes here, sees a thread about a subject he likes like NFL and wants to participate but the thread is locked?


Other forums manage perfectly well with non size locked threads, they don't have performance issues and they don't have impossible to manage threads either. There's little reason to say that the way it is here gives you a "clean" board and massive threads would be "unclean". It's not by experience.

Then he or she can make a new thread?

200 posts I can handle. But why is it on 7 pages? I want my 11 pages back

Fair enough, though if a conversation has got a lot of momentum and a new thread is linked and posted before the lock by a forumer or mod but no one posts in Thread#2 it couldn't have had much interest if no one wants to pick off where they left off. I get what you mean and I am just picking away at the straws
"Search in The Topic" I would really use that feature anyway since I just "Search This Forum" all the time.
Leaving Quote enabled after a lock would be a really useful thing to allow.

As per a realistic approach, the admins are generally very slow to make changes, and usually they aren't catering to users, but more restrictive (*points to Gstaff lingering post threatening to take down CD, longer implementations of the post cooldown, current discussion being far more limited than in the past, etc.*). If anything, experience makes me proclaim if there's any changes to be made on this subject, odds are better of there being 100 posts to a locked topic than higher.

Scary :'(

Well, I do feel like the post cooldown is lower than before though.

I've always found it utterly pointless. When you've got a popular mod, keeping track of the new various topics is a nightmare. Especially if you tend to link to the support topic and readmes and such, the link gets outdated before you even have a chance to publish the new version. Quotes and questions get lost if they're one of the last few posts. Also, if the author isn't available anymore, the topic gets locked, no more support for anyone as the author isn't around to make a new topic. A lot of the time members have really useful advice, but when there's no topic for the mod there's no way for them to give their advice and help others.

Plus in general topics, especially in the Skyrim section, they move so fast that you can expect your topic to be locked within a few hours. Any discussion from the previous topic is basically gone now, you're limiting the replies people can make and pretty much throwing away useful, contributing posts. IMO that kind of defeats the point of a discussion forum.

I also read someone say something about it stopping the forum from running slow, but that's ridiculous. This is Invision Power Board, one of the most popular paid for forum software that is available. It can handle large topics just fine; it's what it's built and designed for. It's not a problem on any other forum, it's certainly not a problem here.

May sound a bit harsh, but a "post limit" on a forum is pretty ridiculous in my opinion. It's just so counter productive.

if you use fast reply there is no cooldown

I don't see how hard it is to follow a topic. Oh dear, this thread was at page 14 yesterday and now its at 17 pages! oh nooo what do I do??? The constant locking is just a waste of time. IT should be more reasonable like 20.

Or just not at all.

thats more of a reason to not allow remakes of threads


and something not mentioned yet... it's typically considered rude to go some place new and tell them they should do things the way you prefer. this is true for many things besides forums as well

Agreed with most everything here. If the general discussion people like 200 post limits for their discussions, that's fine, but in the technical issues subforums, its a pain in the *butt*. When a single massive thread containing all the bugs would be more convenient, we get fragmented chopped-to- pieces "bug list" threads. Which one is the last one? where IS the last one? nobody knows, cause it most likely got locked and drowned out. It's easier for newer members to come and see a giant "bug list" thread with simple rules in the first post, and continue on from there.

Some people hop on jsut to make a quick post about the game, not invest in a new online social life and post here about everything else. They don't read the rules, they don't use the search function, and that's just the way people are on the internet.

not only that, but nowhere am I mentioning having 1000 page threads or unlimited threads here. My first post was to RAISE the post limit to 1000. Then I said raise it to 500 at least. ANYTHING higher just helps in keeping the repeat threads down, and pointless redundant Moderation. doubling the post limit alone, cuts down the amount of repeat threads by 50%

applying a 200 post limit across ALL these boards doesn't work. Technical subforums for game bugs and beta testing shouldn't have a 200 post limit.
Asking a question right before a thread gets locked means your post is more likely to be completely ignored and lost in that last locked thread.