Page 1 of 2

Bumping topics

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:51 pm
by alvinphp
So, I was browsing old topics as I was bored. I came across some I found interesting so I responded to them with valid non trivial responses. They were then locked so I am quite confused. The reason was Necromancy, but this clearly is not the case as I am not posting a reply just to bring it to the top of active threads. I am genuinely responding to a thread I found interesting.

Now if they are going to stay locked, should I just create a new thread on the same subect as it is something I would like to talk about and I feel is still relevant now?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:00 pm
by feyd
accepted behaviour is creating a new thread.

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:10 pm
by Roja
I've been wondering when this was going to become an issue.

Honestly, if the rules want to prevent users from thread necromancy, the forum should be configured to autolock topics after the restricted number of days.. say, 90 days. (Very few topics are really active after 90 days).

It happens fairly often (or else we wouldnt need a rule for it, yes?), and people seem to get bored often.

Personally, I don't look five posts back to see if the thread was necro'd.. if its an interesting topic, and there is a post on it, I reply. As a result, if there aren't active mods locking at will, it can get messy fast. Thats why the autolock would be a great mod to add.

Just my two cents.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 12:35 am
by alvinphp
Well, if that is the rules then I will honor them (even though I think this one is a little over board). :?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:25 am
by m3mn0n
There is no point in bumping them. The people who posted there are most likely long gone and won't respond so it's better to get a fresh one going for the sake of conversation.

You can't have a conversation with 3 year old accounts that don't login.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:38 am
by Nathaniel
Does the mod lock it after no one has posted for 90 days? That would be better than just locking it once 90 days are up.

Edit: I don't see why we need a mod. Just say something in the forum rules about it.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 8:14 am
by feyd
There shouldn't be a reason to say anything in the rules.. it's common netiquette to not resurrect very old threads. Bumping isn't the issue here, it's necrothreading, which is slightly different, but on the whole, in the realm of common sense.

We shouldn't have to lock very old threads.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 8:39 am
by JayBird
Yes, i think this is all down to common sense IMO. No need to have a rule for the smallest thing like this.

For example, we dont explicitly have a rule for refraining from posting in ALL CAPS, but we dont allow it, as many other forums don't. It's netiquette and common sense all rolled into one nice package.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:15 am
by Roja
Pimptastic wrote:Yes, i think this is all down to common sense IMO. No need to have a rule for the smallest thing like this.
The difference between common sense and a rule?

The need to enforce it. :)

The fact that it happens here about twice a week lends itself to being an issue there should be a rule for, as its clear that this bit of "common sense" isn't that common (at least among our readers).
Sami wrote:You can't have a conversation with 3 year old accounts that don't login.
The threads in question were the perfect counter-example. Because the movie was popular ("Office Space"), the lack of the original posters had little impact.. plenty of new people were/are willing to discuss it. Thats the danger with necrothreading - because the topics are popular, they can pop back up over, and over, and over again.

Thats why many of the forums with rules against it have a mod that autolocks them. Its a control that enforces the rule.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:43 am
by Buddha443556
Personally, I'm glad Feyd lock the "OOP" thread last night because I almost replied to that one ... :oops:

Someone else seemed to be necromancing yesterday but I noticed those threads weren't locked. Do celebrities get special consideration? Not that I'm complaining, I was hoping for some insights into PHP security. :wink:

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:49 am
by shiznatix
in 3 years im going to bump this thread. then laugh, laugh like a evil villan. :twisted:

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:54 am
by pilau
I agree we Pimptastic and with Feyd.
We shouldn't lock threads that are 90 months old.. More of the matter not automatically.

People should just bare in minds: when taking a walk on the old streets of DevNet, check the date numbers 8)

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:10 am
by s.dot
hmm I'm more along the lines of ... who cares

I've been using these forums since February and topic bumping doesn't seem to be much of a major problem. I think the current rules are A-OK ;)

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:23 am
by alvinphp
If we go with common sense then what is the reasoning for locking threads simply because they are old? As long as they are still relevant and current posters find it interesting should it not not matter how old it is? And in most boards it is usually worse to create a topic that already exists in the database.

And these past old topics that came up is not necromancy. At least not necromancy as defined by Wikipedia. Necromancy is bumping a very old thread for the sole purpose of bringing it back to the top by either using the word 'bump' or making a trivial reply. I did neither as my sole purpose was to reply to a topic I found interesting.

I always enjoy looking near the back of a forum as you find some off the most interesting topics that were forgotten a long time ago, but are still relevant today. This is the first time in my life I have seen a topic locked simply because it was too old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_necromancy

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:28 am
by Charles256
:: repeats what alvin said: