# Allow a max number of Replies and maintain it automatically

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-a-max-number-of-replies-and-maintain-it-automatically/313027>\
**Category:** Feature\
**Created:** [June 21, 2024, 7:59am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-a-max-number-of-replies-and-maintain-it-automatically/313027 "2024-06-21T07:59:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 11

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Heliosurge](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/heliosurge/32/571810_2.png) [@Heliosurge](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Heliosurge)\
**Post date:** [June 23, 2024, 1:28am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-a-max-number-of-replies-and-maintain-it-automatically/313027/11 "2024-06-23T01:28:47Z")

</div>

A 100 replies was just for simplification.

The idea here is to keep things rolling with less loss. Programming wise? Imho not too difficult as it simply deletes the oldest replies in the batch. Vs the current time based method that wipes out all replies.

With the current method we can say as maybe partially unexpected behaviour. You see a topic has new replies but the content of those replies is empty due to the system wiping the topic clean. With Robert’s proposal there will always be a bit of history that can be reviewed.

There is still info loss. But not complete loss like current method. Robert & I did have a private brainstorm on some supplementary ideas that could reduce info loss. But that is for another topic maybe vs contesting this one with bloat.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-a-max-number-of-replies-and-maintain-it-automatically/313027)._