Most people on this forum don't have Asperger's Syndrome

Post Reply New Topic

necrobumped... good word!
Ha ha!

I'd call it a zombie thread.

I hate bumping a necrobump but, I have to say I think the necrobump was probably due to the "Similar Topics" section at the bottom of each thread page...it's a ridiculous feature that only serves to necrobump. Let's face it, if there's a topic being discussed in two threads concurrently they merge into the larger thus stronger thread-- hierarchy 101.

The person who necrobumped this came here from: viewtopic.php?t=66371&start=30

How they got there I don't know.

I'd just like to say, I live in a forest and I like trees too-- as long as they're not burning.

This does bring up a question I have. Why is there such opposition to zombie threads? Being relatively new to the scene, I like going into the vaults to see what was being posted further back, even to 2004-ish. One thread I liked was about what people felt a diagnosis helped them understand about their past.

But people here seem to get all itchy and irate about old thread resurrections, so I don't do it. I don't see the problem, though, other than the OP is often no longer around. But if it's just a conversation thing, I don't really understand the anti-zombie thread-ism on the forum. I mean, if it is a good discussion, why create a new thread instead of just continue the one already started, which is actually what the forum rules say to do, anyway?

Whilst I do consider myself to be a man of low intelligence, a fully certified assessor of autism diagnosed me with the condition. It's for solely this reason that I am now classified as disabled and why the state no longer expects me to look for employment.

Because most of the time people who have posted in that thread are no longer active here so it's pointless to reply to the OP or to anyone else's post in that thread if it will never be read by them. It's like talking to a wall. Also if someone posted a thread asking for advice or an issue, it's more likely it's been resolved or no longer relevant. Unless it's some random thread like "What kind of tea do you like" then that is okay or if it was some game thread.

It's just an annoyance. Do you want to wade through 10 pages of people's opinions who you'll never interact with? How about wading through all those pages to get current with the topic, then making your statement or quote and as the page refreshes realizing the people you wanted to have a discussion with are long gone. That's a lot of wasted time for the individual user.

Edit: Sorry League_Girl, I said pretty much what you said, but I must have been typing it while you posted-- but I'm not wasting my effort.

Last edited by Aristophanes on 09 Sep 2015, 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The old posters on old threads are not the only people who might possibly read the new posts on old threads. I'm sometimes interested in what people have to say when they necropost, and newer members can get involved in the conversation and possibly even say things that weren't said before. Necroposting doesn't bother me at all; I just want people to be aware that they actually are necroposting rather than thinking they are participating on a current thread.

I agree. It depends on the context of the original thread. Topic specific to the OP, it was probably addressed and resolved years ago. General interest, fine and dandy.

No one needs to read every single past comment. Usually all that is necessary is to read the OP and whatever the newer posters have quoted.

I have a compulsion to be thorough--need is not the issue.

I was diagnosed with Asperger's as an adult in 2001. At around 13 I was misdiagnosed with schizophrenia form disorder, which no one else really believed I had, including me. But what they did think was that my odd or unpleasant behavior was just that, a learned behavior. They thought was the result of being spoiled and overprotected by my parents, especially my mother. They meaning the staff at the home I used to live in and most "professionals" in general.

When I was told I had Asperger's I was a bit unsure at first. There was actually a name for all the things I did that people thought was strange are just plain wrong? I went through what can only be described as sheer hell before I was finally diagnosed with it. I was told that boys got Aspergers more than girls, too. But when I read about how female aspies act in general I knew it must be true because it was so similar to my behavior I'd even heard of Asperger's. My role-playing with dolls and stuffed animals in my teens and even adult years, my intense interests with Garfield comics, troll dolls and Disney cartoons, my one-sided, endless talking about such interests, and my preference of practical, comfortable clothes and general avoidance of makeup and cosmetics. So it's very hurtful when other people don't think I have Aspergers' or that most other people don't and are only using it as an excuse for whatever nonsense.

I thought I addressed the issue of the OP no longer being around when I said, "other than the OP is often no longer around."

And besides, so what if I want to talk to a wall? What's the issue with that? Maybe I want to PM the wall too. And then the wall will PM me back, and then I'll invite the wall to visit my webpage. And then it will friend me on facebook and we'll have a google hangout. We'll text back and forth and the wall will become a good friend of mine.

Exactly. And if someone can relate to the OP experience, what's the problem with continuing the dialogue?

And if someone does post a reply and didn't realize the OP was no longer a member, it serves no purpose to talk down to them or treat them like they should have already known since that "time-stamp checking process" is an executive functioning task which most autistics are impaired at anyway. Suggest they check the original post date, OP profile, and last visited date of the OP profile, and decide whether to post after that.

I'm done posting here. This thread is old. It's like talking to a wall.

In context of the discussion a few posts above, about "necroing" old threads:

My opinion on the matter is that it's fine. I actually think it helps people to find useful information which may help them in their current situation, which they otherwise would not have found. Unless the response is directed towards the original poster, who is almost definitely not going to see the response, then I see no issue. It's like how politicians bring up issues which were previous discussed. It's not bad, it's just bringing to light an issue and giving new, updated opinions on it. The concern there is that the information on old threads is "out-dated" information, especially as far back as 2004, and may no longer be relevant, which means someone may find old information and incorrectly apply it to themselves. In this regard, maybe it's better to open a new discussion, and link the old discussion, so that those who want to see past opinions can do so if needed. I see both sides to the argument.