How do you regard the NECROBUMPING of old threads on WP?

Post Reply New Topic

They also probably all pee'd while standing up. Small world eh ?

wha? they didn't have sitzpinklers then?

I'm not sure about Mozart, he did things, well, differently. On a side note I believe Bach was autistic, his complete adherence to the musical rules of his day and mathematic precision lead me to this conclusion. Most people would say Mozart was the autist of those three, but I think Mozart just liked messing with people-- he would use odd numbered phrases and comedic melodies which don't strike me as particularly autistic. I do, however, appreciate him thumbing his nose at the musical hierarchy of his time though.

I noticed people are being asked not to bump up old threads here anymore. Is this officially against the rules now? How recent does a thread have to be, for it to be acceptable to add a comment?

I gather it is up to each mod to decide for themselves whether such is appropriate for a given thread.

I gather that it's more like it's frowned upon, and the degree of acceptability depends on context. Personally, I get more annoyed by pointless bumps of contentious threads, like someone just continually adding "+1" and such in order to keep a thread on top of a forum, a technique that used to be popular in PPR until a certain bear got banned, and people responding to long departed members in years old threads because they didn't check the date. I see that one pretty often, someone asked for advice back in '07, and someone responds just now because the site has suggested it as a similar topic, and the responder didn't notice the posting date. Really, I think about 6 months is the oldest thread I'd bump, and then only if something really relevant came up and starting a new thread was undesirable for some reason.

Necrobumping is a new word for me. I probably did it a couple of times before figuring out to look for the dates - I read a lot of old posts in the beginning, in order not to start a discussion that people have had a hundred times before.

Do a lot of people come here with experience from other forums? I haven't been hanging out on the internet a lot before joining this forum.

Yeah, the delicious irony of necrobumping a thread about necrobumping, I couldn't resist it. I know that some people apparently loath necrobumping but as far as I'm aware there aren't any rules that say that it can't be done, so approving or disproving of the practise is simply a subjective view. To me the contents of a thread or a post are what matters, not the date it was posted.

That's funny! The last one I saw resurrected was about 10-15 yrs old. Gotta admit that was weird.

I think it should be encouraged. If you're trying to respond to a specific person, it's not effective, but if you're commenting on a general topic or issue from an old thread, I think it's much better to keep the old thread going than to start up yet another one on [some topic that comes up every six months, over and over].

I think that was me too I deliberately looked for the oldest thread that I could find, in order to revive it. I think it was about a book.

Yep, I just checked it was me and it was a twelve year old thread...

Bless The Beasts And Children

After voting on necro-bumping i.e., updating old discussion threads as a practice that is OK under some circumstances, we are prompted to specify.

Specified as follows: Necro-bumping for 'Topical-Discussion Forums' i.e., TV, film, arts, music, and technology may be welcome; as 'Topical Discussions' often deal with abstract concepts; concepts which are often always timely in content.

what harm does it do?

Haha, the necrobumping thread got necrobumped again.

I don't mind it much, but I'm sometimes hesitant to reply to a thread that's been necrobumped. And while some threads, like game threads, are okay to bump, others, like threads where the OP is asking for advice on a specific situation, are pointless to revive.

^^^that is very sensible