Forum Rules Updated

[dlodoski]

Thread Necrophelia

How about we use some common sense and just dont do it , mmmmkay?
A thread 4 years dead is not something generally you expect to see dug up.
I dont advocate death as a punishment. But use common sense, dont you think, be a good policy??

Yea, this has been bothering me as well.

I went through the board settings, looking for an automatic lock feature, but could not find one. I will contact Kookus and see if we can get something in place.

[Nessie]

On necrobumping:

The typeface of the original date is not large enough for it to be obvious, especially to new people. If you can't manage an automatic lock on old threads, maybe just increasing the size and making it bold will decrease the problem.

Nessie

[Fred588]

Personally I do not see the harm in making a reply to a thread just because it is an old one. This is not the same thing, as I see it, as mere bumping. To "bump" a thread, as I understand it, is to bring it to the top without any meaningful contribution.

[Nessie]

Personally I do not see the harm in making a reply to a thread just because it is an old one.

Me neither, really. I class this alongside the misdemeanor of accidentally posting a scene that someone else has already posted. To me it is is a non-event.

Nessie

[dlodoski]

Hmm, this isn't about bumping.

And, when you're on page 14 out of 42 (and that's just going back two years) you should probably be aware of how old the topics are (although I admit this ignores the possibility that a topic came up as a result of a search).

What I'm sure Ken is referring to, and what I'm definitely aware of, is people replying to really old topics to complain about a link no longer working, or a YouTube video no longer being available.

I'm thinking about a two year limit on replying. That's pretty reasonable. If someone is really interested in reaching way back for a "Hey, whatever happened to so and so", or "Did anyone ever find out about ....?", and the topic is locked, they can always link to it.

[kham]

Precisely
How hard is it to just READ the thread? The posting dates are not in microdot and I dont think it's asking for blood to just pay a little attention. Especially in some cases the thread subject is long dead, or the the authors are long gone, or perhaps even deceased. There is a perfectly functional PM system, plus, you can always just start a new thread to raise the point you looking for.

Compared to some boards, this isn't even mild. Plenty give you a smack on the nose to RTFM for offence one, and exponentially increasing pain from that point

[Jon Smith]

Personally I do not see the harm in making a reply to a thread just because it is an old one. This is not the same thing, as I see it, as mere bumping. To "bump" a thread, as I understand it, is to bring it to the top without any meaningful contribution.

I don't like to worry about how old a thread is, but I like to post on some threads that are relevant to me, often being inactive. I really don't see a problem with bumping a thread. I think that instead of preventing everyone from posting on the the thread, something that allows individuals to ignore the thread, sort of like unsubscribing from it.
What kind of problems would this create?

[kham]

It's called "poor etiquette"

A thread 3 years dead, you don't think to wonder that there's a reason it's dead?
That there no further response forthcoming?

Make a new thread
PM the people involved if they still even here or alive

But pretending that a dead thread still has people watching it or even having a clue what it was about? That not rational

[Villein]

While it might be a bit too much work for Moderators, a sub-forum which lists which users have been banned and for what reasons is actually a good idea.
It'll give us a picture of past users behaviour, so perhaps to alert us collectively if or when such a user might be making a return.
Other forums do this as practice and overall it does seem to 'raise the bar' on user behaviour.
It is however creating more work for Moderators.

Given the volunteer nature of this site, I'd not envy the task of moderation nor of creating such a thread or sub-fora.
I'll raise the prospect as an idea here, minds sharper and/or more invested in the subject than my own can discuss and decide for themselves.

[Jon Smith]

It's called "poor etiquette"

A thread 3 years dead, you don't think to wonder that there's a reason it's dead?
That there no further response forthcoming?

Make a new thread
PM the people involved if they still even here or alive

But pretending that a dead thread still has people watching it or even having a clue what it was about? That not rational

They mentioned putting a 2 or 3 year limit on a thread or something, but not all old threads are completely dead.
For example, the one about sinking locations is over 5 years old, people still post on it (I have too). Not to mention that it is a very useful thread, and in my opinion, it gets better with each post. (Specifically that thread)