Why was this done away with? It's one of the most effective means to combat poor quality threads and posts. The userbase sees the reason for the lock and learns from it.
>"Oh, my thread about Donald Trump on /pol/ got locked because there are already 12 other threads about him and I asked a question that has already been answered. I guess I should have looked at the catalog first..."
>permanently locking 95% of threads on /pol/
great Idea, why not make them a sticky too, so everyone can see what the current meta cancer is?
There's no rule against making a thread with a subject that's already being discussed, though.
As for the topic, the boards with the most shit threads are simply too fast for the board itself to notice when something is locked. This most certainly includes /pol/.
>>586905
not too fast.
OP is one of the faggots who don't understand that 95% of the threads on /pol/ are meta threads alá "wow really makes u think" that die with 0 replies within minutes. Even if you lock these threads, right now they're create with 1 thread every 3 seconds.
>>586890
>he thinks mods care about quality threads on /pol/
protip: /pol/ doesn't have a mod who browses it regularly like some other boards. If you see a mod on /pol/ it's because the report queue was too full (or swaglord is trolling people again)
>>586905
>There's no rule against making a thread with a subject that's already being discussed, though.
There is a rule against making low quality posts, that's what you're doing when you make a thread about something that is already being discussed.
>>586908
I'm not talking only about /pol/, I just used it as an example.
