1. Can I just ask, what exactly is the problem with reviving old threads, and why the need to close them when this happens? :(

    I have seen that there is a rule here about not bumping threads, but no reason is given for this rule being in place. But what exactly is the harm? For one thing, it decreases the risk of duplicate threads being made, and for another, if a whole new bunch of people have joined since the thread was last active, and someone happens upon such a thread, then it can open a whole new discussion, which is good as the forum has, on the whole, been pretty quiet over the last few months :(

    And what if someone lurking sees an old thread that can help them with a problem of some kind, so they can post on it, and then other people can chime in and try to help? How can help be given if the thread is then closed? :(

    I was going to add to one of my old threads, but to do so will require pictures, which can't be taken before this coming weekend. So if I were then to post those pictures, thus reviving that thread, no one would be able to give an opinion as it would be closed, having been inactive for over 3 months :(

    I can see why threads that descend into arguments get closed, but if everything is kept both peaceful and informative, then what is the harm, really? :(

    I'm not trying to have a go here; it's just that closing an old thread every time it gets revived just seems a tiny bit much :(
     
  2. Death

    Death Member

    Heh, thought this was my thread from before that also was closed.

    I agree, but I don't know if that helps very much.
     
  3. Sparrow69

    Sparrow69 Moderator

    It was closed because the comment made to revive it was made in response to the users who haven't been on in over a year. While the topic was some what still on topic, the original thread was so far dead that it took major digging to find.

    Now if someone wants to post a similar thread on a similar topic, fine, but reviving threads that old, sets a president to revive ones that are less relevent. Does that mean someone should go and remake all the old topics, NO, because that would clutter the place even more so. The correct etiquette would have been to post a link to the original thread, sharing his/her feeling on what was found while poking around on long dead threads, and ask for other "Active" members for their opinion on the topic they felt important for their situation, which is the message i sent to the original poster, without an infraction , just a friendly request.
     
  4. Sparrow69

    Sparrow69 Moderator

    The difference with this situation is your still here, and as such you posting in your thread would e fine, and people could still comment on it, as its still a conversation your having. the one i closed had been dead for more then 2 years, with the posters who were on it originally, long gone from here.
    Had one of the original posters logged in after such an absence and said, "i was involved in this conversation before, and I'dlike to see how peoples views have changed over the past few years", it might have remained open..
    But the method of its revival was akin to someone calling your house looking for the previous tenants, and trying to hold a conversation with you about something they were discussing with them. It would be odd and awkward.
     
  5. Haha, I know how that last bit feels, because I get that happening to me all the time with all the drunks living around me :D

    Some of that kinda makes sense, I guess. It was just weird, that this rule was set up originally with no explanation as to why. I must have signed up to about 30 forums over the last 2 years, and of those, this one is the only one where the bumping of old threads was/is actually an issue :(
     
  6. Sparrow69

    Sparrow69 Moderator

    because most threads dont get revived, and while that rule is a staple on almost any forum, most mods simply delete the offending post, bumping the thread back to the grave... in this case i didnt think it would be such a dire issue to simply close it and repeat the rule. guess i was wrong.

    problem rectified, all threads older then a year are closed. they can be viewed and referenced, but not posted in.
     
  7. sillylittlepet

    sillylittlepet Active Member

    Ack! I'm guilty of necroposting too
    D:
     
  8. Sparrow69

    Sparrow69 Moderator

    you responded to a thread necromancer... not the same thing ;)
     
  9. I can't honestly say I've seen evidence of this on any other forums I've been on. Yes, one or two people have complained every now and again, but the thread was always left open for people to continue with, and the conversation that flowed was very rich and informative...

    ...not trying to argue here, by the way, just making an observation.
     
  10. Sparrow69

    Sparrow69 Moderator

    observation made, rule still stands Like i said, if the thread necromancer in question wishes to take my advice, and post, then more power to him. As for allowing old threads to remain open when revived by someone not in the conversation, isn't gonna happen.
     
  11. Death

    Death Member

    Might be because it's hard to feel motivation to keep posting when you need to watch yourself from doing it wrong. I know others who have left from here, due to things like this.


    No harm, and this is the first forum I've been to, as well, where these rules are followed this way... can't remember any where it at all has been considered important to keep this "clutter" under control.


    No infraction.... generous.
     

Share This Page