On the other hand, few users understand that (or how) they can create linked topics if they want help on a similar issue as in the closed topic. And on mobile it’s not possible at all when the topic is closed (except via quoting. OK, and via the post date.).
So, how about making reply-as-new-topic easier on closed topics? For example by uncolouring instead of removing the topic reply button on closed topics?
Perhaps it could be a per category setting, but I’m a big fan of cross-linked topics so I don’t really see any damage in just making this a site-wide default.
Yes, there are a lot of topics about reply-as-new-topic (or reply-as-linked-topic), but I couldn’t find any that addresses the problem of replies to closed topics. Did you have any particular previous discussion in mind?
To clarify: the aim with my proposal is to make it easier for staff to close topics where they currently keep them open because they want to make it easy for people to reply if they have a related issue. (I then move these replies into a new topic, but it’s not ideal because the cross-topic linking is not as good and, of course, it’s extra work).
As an aside: I received no notification of your reply whatsoever. This looks like a bug. In fact, I see that I’m not watching this topic, despite being the OP, so it’s probably related to the moving plus you probably replying as a topic-reply?
I’m also interested in “reply-as-new-topic” in closed topics where the topic was closed automatically (due to timeout set in category settings).
For categories where staff has manually closed the topic, definitely doesn’t ever make sense to facilitate replies. But in cases where the timeout closed the topic, doesn’t helping new users reference the existing content on the topic provide valuable context for a new discussion?
This thread had a lot of relevant discussion
Even Sam himself suggested the same thing:
Maybe we leave the reply button on closed topics and have it flick open reply as new topic
But Jeff said:
I think that would be super super dangerous personally. Maybe only for tl2 users or higher.
I assume the danger here is perpetual discussion of topics that the staff has determined is inappropriate or not productive for the site.
Perhaps “closing” a topic due to expiration though is different than manually closing a topic as part of moderation… And if so, continuing the discussion in context may be appropriate.
Feels to me like it is the same thing. We auto close stuff that is solved here, cause it is solved. If you need to continue discussion then flagging to reopen or delete or something is the right thing to do vs having a “solution” marked correct when it is not.
Close timers to me are just the same as closing and don’t need special treatment.
I recognize the irony of bumping this particular Topic, but has there been any progress on this issue?
Certain Discourse forums I frequent [1, 2] have fairly indiscriminate time-based auto-close, and facilitating linking to older conversations while still having a fresh, new conversation thread would be useful under those circumstances.
Basically what might be nice is for there to be an administration setting for replacing the former “Reply” button at the bottom of time-based auto-closed Topics with a somewhat similarly designed “Reply with New Topic”. Here’s a mockup I made using the web inspector:
Again, enabling or disabling this button would be an option in the administration preferences, right next to the settings for the auto-close timeout itself. And calling it “New Linked Topic” (or something) rather than “Reply With New Topic” emphasizes that it would just prefill a link to the closed topic (and possibly duplicate the closed Topic’s category and tags) as a template while opening a draft for a new Topic.
This is totally doable today using a theme component. I estimate it would be about 1-4 hours of work depending on the persons Discourse skills. Perhaps post on #marketplace ?
That is useful to know, and I appreciate the suggestion. I am not personally inclined to spend money on this feature at this point, though, since I am not involved in administering any Discourse instances myself.
I posted here because the issue had come up on Discourse instances I do not personally administer, so I thought the perspective might be useful, idk. (I posted links to this thread on both of those instances, so there’s a reference point if someone else does feel like spending the money.)
