Auto-expire discussions


Is there a way the site admins can lock or auto expire threads and discussions so that users cannot repost to them? We have questions two or more years old that random users will post to causing the original thread to lose relevancy. It would be good to see this in an on-going basis, e.g. if a thread has not been updated in one month, then auto expire it, causing it to become read only. That would greatly improve the utility of this forum.


On a quick glance i cant find such setting in SBS Admin Console. Maybe it can be altered via system property, but i don’t know it. I can surely lock a thread manually. You can point to threads you think should be locked.

But i do not agree to auto lock threads just after a month. Some threads can stay relevant for a longer time (testing some bug and providing information once per week or so). One year maybe.

Auto-archiving can be enabled here:

I’ve never used the feature, so I’m not sure what options are available or the implications of using it. - created 02-Feb-2010 and still active.

There is a difference for “Support” and “Developers”.

In any case I did move this to Community Planning

“Spaces, Settings, Thread Archive Settings” allows one to enable archiving ( for Benjamin).
One can configure archiving for every space (I assume that sub-spaces are included).
One can define the number of days after which “archived” will be displayed, default is 365 days.
One can also choose an action:

  • Do Nothing - Just mark the thread as “archived”
  • Delete the Content
  • Move the thread (likely to a read-only or hidden space)

So we now have the option to change things.

Maybe 3 month for support and 1 year for developer threads before moving them to a read-only “Archive” space?

After 3 years delete all threads from the “Archive” space?

I didn’t think too much about this, but I’d like to enable archiving and I really wonder whether we really need to keep all threads. Of course a discussion about the Jive Messenger to Openfire migration may be interesting for a few users which still use JM. But they had more than enough time to update.

I don’t like the idea of auto-locking threads at all. For each unwanted revival that you prevent, you’ll prevent two others that were indeed useful. If there’s abuse on a partiuclar thread, it could be closed manually.

I say 1 year for everything before archiving. And i don’t like the deleting idea (in any Internet resource, not just these forums). My thread with Openfire custom daemon instructions may be still relevant, even after 5 years, and there may be other useful threads (just for the sake of tracking, that something was discussed and some decision was made)…

This was a setting I pleaded with Dawn to disable many moons ago. I am very much against locking threads automatically.

My thread with Openfire custom daemon instructions may be still relevant, even after 5 years, and there may be other useful threads
You could convert it to a document.

Do you think that one can still find these old threads?

I really wonder why one does want to keep everything. Do you still have the 1st and all following phone bills?

Archiving does as far as I can tell nothing, the thread is not read-only or locked. It’s just marked as archived.

Some don’t want to move the threads into a read-only space while I really wonder who would like to revive a Wildfire or a Spark 2.3 thread.

A short summary, other contributors are welcome to comment, we don’t accept abstinence (;

Mark thread as archived (3/5 - Bea, wroot, LG)

Make thread read-only (2/5 - Bea, LG)

Delete very old threads (1/5 - LG)

Your summary misses an option

don’t change a thing (2/5 - Daryl, Guus)

This maybe was not the best example, but not every thread can be turned into a doc, and i prefer threads for discussions. Anyway. I can’t explain it, but yes, i like and want to save everything. I don’t recieve phone bills, so i don’t save them, but i save lots of other stuff. Forums and bills are not really comparable though This is a content created by community users. Does it take so much space? Or maybe it affects indexing? Well, SBS search is lame anyway

I don’t know whether it needs a lot of space or leads to less useful search results.

No phone bills? One big point for you (;

As long as we have a 2:3 “Make thread read-only” voting result we’ll likely change nothing anyway.