Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Reviving Old Threads: Why not?

Last response: in Forum Feedback
Share
September 23, 2010 4:25:26 PM

The same people who nag about "bumping an old thread" will whine about posting your issue if it's been posted before and tell you to "use the search feature" as if you're retarded and can't see the gigantic search bar, which is completely useless unless the old thread gives a solution.

I don't seem to fully grasp this obnoxiously hypocritical and contradictory point of view. Maybe you can help me; what are we supposed to do if we have an issue previously posted by others that has gotten no answer? Take it elsewhere?

More about : reviving threads

September 23, 2010 4:35:29 PM

I think a lot of people skip over the threads that have hundreds or thousands of views, because we know/assume they are necro threads. A lot of times they are revived by a SPAMMER, or a 1 and done newcomer.

A fresh thread is much more likely to get responses to your, and only your issue.

When someone bumps a thread, it's usually their own, and it's not usually months or years old.

I don't know if this is everyone's view on it, but that's mainly how I see it.
September 23, 2010 6:11:19 PM

If it's revived by a spammer the course of action is obviously banning the spammer and their IP. But if it's just a new comer reviving a thread that relates to their issue, I don't see the problem.

I understand what you're saying though. You're saying that each case has to be looked individually. Which is true. In which case if I was a moderator I'd guide the user to make a new thread or move it myself as the conditions and symptoms are slightly different. I'm a mod on a couple of forums and that's what I do when people go off topic.

However many problems are rather popular and you'll see hundreds of people all across the internet posting the exact identical issue. In that case, it's actually better to have them post it in a thread that already has established what the issues is, what solutions have helped and what hasn't. Don't you think?
Related resources
September 23, 2010 8:02:06 PM

amirgtr said:
If it's revived by a spammer the course of action is obviously banning the spammer and their IP. But if it's just a new comer reviving a thread that relates to their issue, I don't see the problem.


We do ban, but it still revives the thread. We don't currently have IP banning.


amirgtr said:
I understand what you're saying though. You're saying that each case has to be looked individually. Which is true. In which case if I was a moderator I'd guide the user to make a new thread or move it myself as the conditions and symptoms are slightly different. I'm a mod on a couple of forums and that's what I do when people go off topic.


We can't just move a post from an old thread, and create a new thread, using that post. It sounds nice, but we don't have that feature. This is where the person is usually advised to start a new one, if the situation calls for it.


amirgtr said:
However many problems are rather popular and you'll see hundreds of people all across the internet posting the exact identical issue. In that case, it's actually better to have them post it in a thread that already has established what the issues is, what solutions have helped and what hasn't. Don't you think?


When I see an old thread that has periodic updates, or legit suggestions/solutions, I let it go on for that reason. I've seen this mostly in our Computer Brand section, when dealing with an issue specific to the OEM model.
September 23, 2010 8:30:06 PM

Theres also necro threads that have brand new solutions, far easier than the "OLd way" of doing things, especially when the old accepted way can be tedious
September 24, 2010 12:50:56 AM

I will close threads that have been bumped because for one thing it's against the rules of etiquette that have been posted in every forum and it's also akin to queue jumping and what makes that thread anymore important than any of the other hundreds of threads that are in play at any one time. Dragging up old and inactive threads is even more annoying as for the most part the OP is either long gone or has completely forgotten about the thread and moved on.
September 24, 2010 2:27:27 AM

You could always reference an old thread you found in your new thread if you want people to understand what you've read and done without repeating it all.
September 24, 2010 4:03:47 AM

It's an exposure issue then. I understand.

But it's a pretty common thing to see people find old threads with their issue and ask "so what did you end up doing?".

So mousemonkey, can you unlock my threads so I can update them with whatever solution ended up working? Then you can go ahead and close them.
September 24, 2010 4:35:56 AM

I was wondering if something like that was coming up! ;) , PM me with links to the threads in question and I'm sure we can work something out.
September 24, 2010 4:41:33 AM

Most of the time the "so what did you end up doing?" or "thanks XYZ, that worked for me too!" posts are made in threads that are half a decade old, some even in Usenet archives (I wish we'd burn them all).
September 24, 2010 3:13:47 PM

It's always a bad idea to do what is called "necroposting", where you dig up an ancient thread by posting a response to it. Some forums will actually ban you if you do it enough. It is far better to re-create the thread and leave the old one to posterity.
September 26, 2010 11:27:10 PM

I concur with everyone. There has been a fair amount of necro posts of late dating back to 8-9 years ago, which is absolutely outrageous, hence why we close them. More recent ones can and do stay open if there is a truly good answer to an issue that we would see as relatively common.
September 28, 2010 10:31:37 PM

+1 to above posts. Also, for threads that have a MIA OP and a few months old (ie 4-6+) and get necroed asking if OP found the solution are also annoying. I generally report these threads along with spam and ancient threads to the mods so that they can be locked or dealt with as the mods see fit.

Hell I had people bumping up one of my old threads (OCing guide for DS3L) every couple of months and that was annoying cause I was no longer keeping track of that thread. I had to ask random to lock it due to this.
November 7, 2010 1:45:58 PM

Cant we just make it so that closed threads get sent to the bottom of the Forum ? Mousemonkey closes solved threads over on the graphics section but that leaves us with pages of locked threads. Not complaining about that, its all that can be done from what i understand. How many pages are there on the server anyway ? Actually i just checked and there are posts on there at page 1000 from 2001.
Do we really need posts that old ? If threads that are say 1 month old with no reply get automatically locked and sent to the bottom of the pile along with closed/locked threads it would help to keep questions awaiting answers on the first few pages of the forums, also it would stop necro posting.

Mactronix :) 
November 7, 2010 10:36:39 PM

The only way to keep them where they were is to lock them and remove the post that states that the thread was locked. An option to not have this automatic post appear would be nice.
November 14, 2010 12:42:46 AM

mactronix said:
Cant we just make it so that closed threads get sent to the bottom of the Forum ? Mousemonkey closes solved threads over on the graphics section but that leaves us with pages of locked threads. Not complaining about that, its all that can be done from what i understand. How many pages are there on the server anyway ? Actually i just checked and there are posts on there at page 1000 from 2001.
Do we really need posts that old ? If threads that are say 1 month old with no reply get automatically locked and sent to the bottom of the pile along with closed/locked threads it would help to keep questions awaiting answers on the first few pages of the forums, also it would stop necro posting.

Mactronix :) 


I 2nd that suggestion, if it were possible that would be great if the locked threads of this year, would at least be dropped to the beginning of the year, and why are we keeping threads all the way back to 2001, there is nothing from 2001 technologically relevant today, this forum is in serious need of an enema.
November 14, 2010 12:58:34 AM

amirgtr said:
The same people who nag about "bumping an old thread"


Sometimes users dealing with serious problems are desperate for some help and that's the real reason they bump their threads to keep them at the top of the list, under those circumstances I personally don't have a problem with someone doing that.

Unfortunately the Rules of Conduct, rule against it but I personally have never banned anyone from this forum for bumping a thread and have no future plans of doing so, bumping a thread is just not a deal breaker to me, maybe a warning if it gets excessive but that's about it, as far as I am concerned.

!