Responding to old threads

[Comatose]

I think it should be in the rules, that posting to old threads is a no no. It's not actually considered a member rule... just poor etiquette. So, if I wanted to be an obnoxious ass (more so than I am already), I could just start responding to old threads all over the place. Granted, it would destroy any kind rep that exists, but I could point out "it's not considered a rule". Why not just add it in there under like "Keep it spam free"?

I just mean, it's kind of a pain to bark at people about posting to old threads (yes, I know about the cute little text by the post box... but they obviously don't.) when I have nothing to direct them to about their behavior.

[~s.o.s~]

It's not officially against the rule since any valuable addition to a thread discussion is more than welcome. Useless bumps to old threads are simply forked off as new threads. Just report any such occurrence and the moderator team would act accordingly.

[Comatose]

Wait, so even a valuable addition in 2009 to a thread in 2004 is welcome?

[Narue]

>I think it should be in the rules, that posting to old threads is a no no.
Dani has stated many times that necrobumping is allowed as long as the new post is on topic and can be viewed as a continuation of the discussion.

A "me too!" post (where the gray area lies) doesn't count as a continuation because it's a new question and deserves a new thread. In that case we move the post to a new thread and issue a warning for Keep It Organized.

Anything else is easily determined as either on topic or off topic and can be dealt with appropriately or ignored.

[Dani]

Firstly, not all threads here are tech support questions where there's a definitive question and answer and then everything after that is off-topic. Some threads are open-ended discussions. You should also keep in mind that threads aren't just meant to help the thread starter ... they continuously help people for months and years to come. If someone has something constructive to add to a thread, I would hate for them to not do so just because the thread hasn't been updated in a few months or the OP is no longer around.

> So, if I wanted to be an obnoxious ass (more so than I am already), I could just start responding to old threads all over the place.
If you had something constructive to add to each one, that would be of use to future thread viewers, then by all means, please go ahead! On the other hand, if you just started bumping hundreds of threads with off-topic nonsense, then that would fall under the rule violation of trolling.

[The Dude]

Dani thinks alot like me (Maybe cause we are both Libra's)

Why do people make a big deal about dates???

CANT DEAL WITH THE PAST?

Get over it.... Almost every site im on its the same garbage and it makes me sick!! (I feel restricted cause someone (Staff) might get OFFENDED IF I FIND A GOOD THREAD WITH A LAST REPLY DATE IN 2001 I WANNA REPLY TO!)

If the link in the thread IS STILL VALID,why not??

Good Grief..

[Narue]

>Why do people make a big deal about dates???
It concerns how the forum handles recent activity. If you post to a thread that isn't currently on the first page, you bump it up to the first page, which sends a thread that is on the first page down to the second page.

Paging is important because most people don't browse to the second page. Falling to the second page is basically a death sentence for a thread and if it isn't a solved thread, you've ruined the OP's chances of getting an answer.

It's a breach of netiquette and considered extremely rude because the ancient thread you've resurrected was either answered or abandoned and we consider it far less important than the recent thread you shoved away to get the ancient one to the top of the list.

So why do people make a big deal about dates? Because unlike you, we're considerate enough to think about the people who need help now as opposed to any selfish addition to a forgotten discussion that we might be able to make.

[The Dude]

It's a breach of netiquette and considered extremely rude because the ancient thread you've resurrected was either answered or abandoned and we consider it far less important than the recent thread you shoved away to get the ancient one to the top of the list.

Then people should delete all threads older then 60 days NO ACTIVITY on every site instead of saying they cant be replied to... (Which is unfair)

You have a good point bud,but i still think its silly to make such a big deal about something so little.....

[Comatose]

,but i still think its silly to make such a big deal about something so little.....

It's not really so little. It's garbage in fact. I'd guess that 80% of the time the thread is solved and marked as such. So, the vast majority of the time people are posting to an old thread, there has already been a resolution.... there isn't much more you can contribute to that. Problem, discussion, resolution... now, even people who run across the thread from a search engine, with the same problem have everything they need... "oh that's my problem too... and this is how it was fixed". Then you get the people who have a similar problem, but it's not the same problem... and instead of posting a new thread, they simply hijack the solved one. I guess you can count that to pure laziness, which shows a little something about the person requesting help... quite frankly, I don't want to help lazy people. They want me to do their homework for them. If that were the end of it, ok... but it's not.

It gets even worse if you like to be notified about recent posts to threads you've helped in. Now I get notification messages about problems I already fixed.... years ago. It would be one thing, if it wasn't a solved thread... but even that was abandoned, and probably because it wasn't an original question, and the only response was a link to the same problem with a solution... or because some dolt decided to knock it to page 2 by necrobumping some other ancient thread. Now, when I say an "unsolved thread", I don't mean just one that was marked as solved either. I've got around two thousand posts, and only around 200 are marked as solved.

Now, the site owner has made her stand, and it's clear. I may not agree with her decision, but it is hers to make, and has been made. However, don't try to trivialize the nuisance just because it doesn't immediately bother you.

[Toba]

Dani thinks alot like me (Maybe cause we are both Libra's)

Astrology is a good strategy for use on internet forums for deciding who you should align yourself with, especially when you don't actually understand what is going on.

[Narue]

>Then people should delete all threads older then 60 days NO ACTIVITY on every site
You fail. I answered your question; if you want to continue defending your opinion, learn to debate before trying again. You're wasting everybody's time with immature games.

>but i still think its silly to make such a big deal about something so little.....
Say that after your question goes unanswered because some arrogant know-it-all decided to say "i agree!!1" on a four year old thread. You're trivializing something because you don't understand how it feels, and that's entirely my point. You neglected to take into account the feelings of others when constructing your opinion and came to a completely selfish conclusion.

[MidiMagic]

I'm sick of these rules that dictate when you can post on what thread. WHO originally decided that this should be a rule - some government bureaucrat? Or was it a webmaster trying to conserve disk space?

The usual case of a post to an old thread occurs in this way:

1. The person has a problem, and Googles it.

2. Google takes the person to a dead thread.

3. The person does not know how to navigate the site yet. He does not want to lose the location he found, so he bookmarks it.

4. He does what he can find in a short time. He registers to post on the site.

5. He then uses the bookmark to return to the thread he found, and posts his question on the topic.

It's how I found DaniWeb.

Another problem is that different BBSs have different sets of rules on what to do. Another site I frequent dislikes new topics on the same subject already discussed on old topics, and demands that you search for old topics.

[jbennet]

i personally think its fine unless someone posts something dumb like "lol" to a joke thread from 2004....

[Ezzaral]

I'm sick of these rules blah blah...

Another problem is that different BBSs have different sets of rules blah blah

Well, yes, distinct cultures have their own varying ideas on what is and is not acceptable interaction. Not really a new thing - ask any sociologist. Get over it or find a culture that doesn't make you "sick".