Is there a specific reason for the session timeout being as it is now?
I'm just curious if this changed for statistical clarity, or if the effect was merely an inadvertent one.

It's quite painful to bookmark into "posts since last visit", and be off in page 4 or whatever, then
take a short break to eat dinner or watch a TV show... and upon my return, when I page back to what
should've been a new "page one", I get the message "No record matches the search criteria" instead.
Gone, are the several pages I'd had queued up for reading... including all "posts since last visit", and
posts that occurred while I was in the process of visiting "this time".

In the olden days, a break of thirty minutes to an hour meant I'd come back to find an extra 4 or 5
pages, on a slow night... with page 4 drifted off to page 8 or so by then... but keeping every thread, old
and new, still available to me. To have that all simply "disappear" is just a little disappointing, because
the only way to view posts you missed is to click on "Today's posts" and start weeding through it all.
It's just not the same, somehow.

(The old way, is the same way I've read Usenet groups, for years now... by marking everything read
whenever I exit, thus having "posts since last visit", essentially, upon my return. As long as my news
reader stays open, whether for forty minutes or forty hours, I will continue to see all the posts since
my last visit, to read at my leisure. A quick "get new posts" performs the same function as going back
to "page one" on RCU used to... making even newer posts available, while maintaining the old, as well.)


Is there any way for us to get that old functionality back?
(Where the "last visit" value... and/or any cookie(s) didn't get reset until we'd closed and re-visited RCU.
Thus, the user determined when their "visit" was over... and not some preset "session inactivity" timer.)

If it's simply "not happening", that's OK.
I "might" even be able to script around the timer, client-side. The attempt might be interesting, at least.
I figured I'd ask first, if this was some "non-critical" setting, that might possibly get reverted to "the old way"

(And I know I've brought this up before... but not sure if I was very clear on the detrimental effects. Sorry.)

Thanks for reading.