Automatically bumping old topics on a category

is the system avatar needed in the topic list?

it doesn’t give a good feeling to meet a machine-type avatar in the first page, also it doesn’t make sense to change this avatar to a more human-based image.

1 Like

Yeah I feel the same, I am not sure what avatar to give it though… a simple fix here would be assigning meta system user a nicer avatar.

Maybe Baymax works better, he is certainly softer.

We could also let discobot do the bumping if it exists … which may make more sense here. Will change that tomorrow.


would be awesome :heart_eyes:! knowing that his duty is to take care of the community health!


Earlier today, I wanted to try this new feature and set our support category to 3 topics per day. About 20 minutes later, I realized that this was not a good idea because we have plenty of formally unresolved but de-facto resolved support topics so I turned it off again by setting it to 0 topics per day. However, at the time of writing, we’ve nevertheless had ten (!) old topics bumped.

Am I misunderstanding how this is supposed to work or is this some kind of double bug (it’s not obeying the max of three topics per day and it’s ignoring that I turned if off before the first topic was bumped. We’re on v2.1.0.beta2 +274

1 Like

We had some issues with this earlier this week, be sure to be on latest … 324 or up…

Is there value in keeping these open forever?


No, but:

So I’d prefer to keep most of them open until it’s easy for people to reply to a closed topic.

Also, we still have a bunch of uncategorized topics from migrating and categorizing those has priority.

So this 2014 topic just got bumped:

Doesn’t feel very useful :slight_smile:
I’d put in a limit on the original posting date, you don’t want to be boosting years old posts.
E.g. only bump posts from the past week or so.

1 Like

Point taken on this issue - there are a few of the older topics being bumped and they get archived if they are no longer relevant (which I have done here, so the link may not work - but your point remains).

There is probably some admin we need to do on older, open topics, but the principle of bumping is still useful, but I agree that there might be some benefit of a limit on post age

1 Like

I’m just deleting old stuff that gets bumped that is of no future value.

(Usually because it refers to old versions of Discourse which may not exist in the previously discussed form.)


In considering implementation of auto bumping, this has been my concern. We have a problem solving category where I’d like to see unsolved topics bumped, except in cases where it is clear the OP has abandoned the topic. Typically we tag these with an “incomplete” tag and after enough time has lapsed either delete them or move them out of the category and unlist them.

Any thoughts about adding an admin-configurable option to the auto-bumping settings to exclude topics based on tags?

1 Like

Is there any reason you don’t have “auto-close {x} days after the last reply” set in this category? That would resolve the situation, since all topics would eventually close as stale, unless someone replies to them.

We do, but the goal is to solve, not just to close. If the auto-close timer is longer than the auto-bump frequency, this could conceivably exacerbate the problem for abandoned topics.

  1. OP posts a problem.
  2. Helpful member replies with troubleshooting steps or a request for additional details.
  3. OP does not respond.
  4. (a) Now: Eventually topic closes.
  5. (b) With Auto-bump: Topic is bumped; goto 2.

So auto-bump {x} topics per day is enabled…

… and the topic will be auto-closed if there are no replies in {x} days, which is as clear an indication of abandonment as I can think of?

Maybe there’s a tiny edge condition where the OP is only editing their post, not replying, but that’s incredibly rare.

When a customer posts an issue he’s having, it can fall silent for two reasons.

  • The Community replies and the OP never responds further
  • The Community does not reply.

Yes, auto-close could take care of the former. (We still have to deal with the impact to our target goal of a high percentage of “solved” topics in the category.)

I’d like to use auto-bump to help with the latter. If a topic is bumped, the Community would be reminded that this person still needs help.

But if I implement auto-bump, I would need to to exclude the topics where the OP has fallen silent, and thought perhaps a tag-exclusion would serve that need.

I’m failing to see how I could auto-close topics without closing those where the Community needs to be reminded to answer, or auto-bump topics without bumping the OP-abandoned topics.

@tophee, I think you would understand what I’m trying but apparently failing to explain, as it seemed to be the same problem you ran into. Can you help me here?


No, sorry, I’m also lost. The problem I described seems quite different to me: I don’t want to close topics as long as it’s not easy for people with a similar issue to reply-as-linked topic and because of that I can’t use auro-bump because it will bump stuff that probably shouldn’t be bumped.

Oh, maybe you are saying that your requested feature (prevent auto-bump based on tags) would also solve my problem? Is that what you mean? - Well, technically yes, I could tag go ahead and tag all those old open topics to prevent them from being bumped, but no, I don’t think I’d bother. I’m fine with leaving them open for now. I guess my point was a more general one of making closed topics “less closed” in a sense.

But back to your problem: as I understand it, you have two types of old topics,

  1. abandoned: these are lost causes and should not be bumped and be closed.
  2. pending: these should be bumped and not be closed.

I think what I’d do is simply turn off auto-close and instead use auto-bump as a follow-up mechanism that reminds staff to manually close the topic when they think the time is ripe.

Another way of putting this is: how do you know whether any given open topic is abandoned or pending? The only way of knowing is by looking at it (possibly repeatedly) and making a decision. Auto-bump is the mechanism that helps you do precisely that.


Ok, thanks for trying to help me.

Yes, with the difference, I guess, being that we’re already tagging and it would be additional work for you.

I had not thought of bumping as a mechanism to remind moderators to take action. :thinking:

Maybe once I have it implemented I can either make it work as it’s designed, or do a better job of explaining my request.

The way I would love to see this feature work is bumping topics that have no replies, we have a photo critique category and posts can quickly fall off the map with so many posts, it would be great to have these brought back up to ensure everyone receives a reply.


it seems that the bumps are counted in the unread list. isn’t it better if the bumps aren’t count as a reply?

I understand the feature request you are making but feel the bump would be way too soft if we did not make the staff post, it would also make latest look pretty confusing


I really can’t understand this part. Can someone elaborate on it?