Suggestion Box

[SeaMaiden]

I think the old threads should be locked.  That way they can be viewed without being opened.  Why can't they do this? 

[sunshine45]

---

@SeaMaiden wrote:

I think the old threads should be locked.  That way they can be viewed without being opened.  Why can't they do this? 

---

more than likely it has to do with the software program they are using.

[GenXmuse]

It makes entirely too much sense, that's why they don't do it. 

[x Hedge]

---

@mom2four0418 wrote:

---

@x Hedge wrote:

@mom2four0418 ,

Not if it's called to the mod's attention

Not in every case.

---

Who is so rigid, that they can't deal with the exception when they see it?

Either report it or ignore it.

Don't make it sound like it's somehow the mods fault after someone bumps up an old thread.

[mom2four0418]

---

@x Hedge wrote:

---

@mom2four0418 wrote:

---

@x Hedge wrote:

@mom2four0418 ,

Not if it's called to the mod's attention

Not in every case.

---

Who is so rigid, that they can't deal with the exception when they see it?

Either report it or ignore it.

Don't make it sound like it's somehow the mods fault after someone bumps up an old thread.

---

Are you directing your statement to me? Please show me where I said that it was the moderators' fault.

[Sheila P-Burg]

As @SeaMaiden said, the old threads should be locked so no one can mistakenly respond. Best case scenario would be to delete them.

Any skilled IT department should be able to install a program capable of accomplishing either action.

Such a silly rule for "bumping an old thread". And yet worse things occur with no threats.

It should not be the Mods responsibility to "lock" or "delete" the old threads or to monitor whether someone has responded to an old thread. QVC's IT department really needs to step up and make some minor improvements to the forum.

The poster that responded to the OP about "bumping" also could have handled their response nicer. Instead they came across as threatening.

[Sheila P-Burg]

@mom2four0418  ...... You didn't ask me but I am responding anyway. You did not refer to it being the Moderatot's fault in your posts. The way @x Hedge responded they agree with you that some "bumped" threads are allowed. Question is what is the "exception" to the rule?

[kaydee50]

@Sheila P-Burg  I agree.  I am amazed that I've found posts that started years ago and have had no recent activity.  It should be relatively simple to delete any and all posts that have been inactive for a year or more.

[RespectLife]

I don't think it is necessary to delete them.

I have had old posts come up in a search that were valuable to me.  Especially recipes!

I wouldn't want them deleted.

[NickNack]

---

@blueroses47 wrote:

I've never had that happen, but if I did I would feel exactly the same as you.  

That reply by the moderator sounds ridiculous to me.  If that post was left up, why in the world shouldn't you respond to it?  Check the date?  or you could get banned?  What a rude and nonsensical response.

These people who run these things aren't doing a good job, obviously.  

I wouldn't care if I did get banned, oh my heavens, for "violating"  community "standards".  Maybe that moderator should look at his/her own standards in running this two bit operation.

---

@blueroses47   As someone else said, that reply wasn't from a moderator.  It was from a fellow poster.  When a moderator replies to a bumped post, they just say that the post was deleted because it was bumping up an old thread.