So I read the forum rules before making a thread about this, on the topic of bumping/necro-posting... But some things are still not very clear to me. Is it ok to bump a old thread as long as the topic it is discussing still has value or is relevant? I see this happen quite a bit, specifically in the off topic forums; somebody bumps a thread that is a few months old since the last reply, a few other people post either not caring or suspecting anything of it, then somebody finally notices it and bashes the person who bumped the thread even though nobody else seems to really care.
I personally don't mind the thread bumping as long as the thread isn't on the topic of a question that is already answered by fact and not by ones own interpretation. A few months back I've seen two of the exact same RPG personality test threads on the first page of General OT. Having duplicates of a certain topic just because one is "older" than the other just seems untidy to me... And in that case neither thread was locked as far as I know. Why not just keep everything in one thread, regardless of last post date, as long as the topic is still valuable, and not some outdated or already answered question.
Can anyone clear this up for me or perhaps share their thoughts? What cases would a thread at one point been considered valuable, but no longer be considered valuable in the present day (other than what I have just mentioned)? Would it be ok to make the request that this particular forum rule should be made a bit more clear or specific?
Necroposting is not[/b] posting in an old thread, Necroposting has a very specific meaning: it's resurrecting a dead thread for no reason[/b].
A thread is not dead if valid discussion can still be had and every
member is very much welcome to post useful posts in old threads, just
like members should only be posting useful topics in new threads...
however we are of course more strict on useless posts in old threads
because it's a bigger inconvenience for other users.
If the rules on this aren't clear we can adjust them to be more clear
So you can post to a thread that is old if your information is good and useful.
IMO a thread is not "really old" if it's been less than 6 months since last reply.
Yeah, that rule's one of the more vague ones, and there's plenty of times where I reckon someone broke the rule when apparently they didn't. I think posts that have been inactive for more than a month should not be brought back unless you have something very meaningful to add, and the main users that were involved in the thread are still noticeably active.
Having two dependencies on subjectivity (how old is old and how useful is useful), it's not a well thought-out rule.
So I read the forum rules before making a thread about this, on the topic of bumping/necro-posting... But some things are still not very clear to me. Is it ok to bump a old thread as long as the topic it is discussing still has value or is relevant? I see this happen quite a bit, specifically in the off topic forums; somebody bumps a thread that is a few months old since the last reply, a few other people post either not caring or suspecting anything of it, then somebody finally notices it and bashes the person who bumped the thread even though nobody else seems to really care.
I personally don't mind the thread bumping as long as the thread isn't on the topic of a question that is already answered by fact and not by ones own interpretation. A few months back I've seen two of the exact same RPG personality test threads on the first page of General OT. Having duplicates of a certain topic just because one is "older" than the other just seems untidy to me... And in that case neither thread was locked as far as I know. Why not just keep everything in one thread, regardless of last post date, as long as the topic is still valuable, and not some outdated or already answered question.
Can anyone clear this up for me or perhaps share their thoughts? What cases would a thread at one point been considered valuable, but no longer be considered valuable in the present day (other than what I have just mentioned)? Would it be ok to make the request that this particular forum rule should be made a bit more clear or specific?
Quote of a Quote!
So you can post to a thread that is old if your information is good and useful.
IMO a thread is not "really old" if it's been less than 6 months since last reply.
Yeah, that rule's one of the more vague ones, and there's plenty of times where I reckon someone broke the rule when apparently they didn't. I think posts that have been inactive for more than a month should not be brought back unless you have something very meaningful to add, and the main users that were involved in the thread are still noticeably active.
Having two dependencies on subjectivity (how old is old and how useful is useful), it's not a well thought-out rule.