Necrobumping/Thread creation

I don't really like the 6 month rule, because different forums move at different speeds and bumping isn't as big a deal in certain types of threads. It should also be mentioned that the user make it clear that they are aware they are bumping an inactive thread when doing so, and that if they're ever in doubt they should ask a staff member first (that way they'll be sure not to get into trouble!).

 

I'm liking it so far, andwhy, except the "contribute's."
That apostrophe has got to go, it isn't pulling its weight.

 

Are new members allowed to re-discuss things together that have already been discussed on the bumped thread?

 

I suppose so

I also forgot to mention things like the "quick answer"-type threads in the modding section, which were created to stop necrobumping in those subforums period, so yeah I guess in those cases it's not really allowed at all and we should make note of that too

EDIT: Aaaaand now we have yet another smattering of fine examples of 'contributing to old threads' I get the feeling there's a bigger issue here that needs looking at...

 

Maybe we should make it like this:

6. You are allowed to bump old threads only providing it is with a post that contributes to that thread's original topic rather than that thread's current topic of conversation (i.e. replying to someone from 2 years back is not cool). In fact it is generally preferred over making a new thread. However, any bumping of threads that do not meet these conditions are frowned upon, and will probably result in post deletion. Likewise, do not respond to dead threads when they are bumped to tell the person in question not to necrobump, since such posts are considered to be spam.

Does this work?

 

It sounds good to me. I just hope newbies are able to fully comprehend it.

 

Why not make threads auto-lock if they have not been posted in within a certain duration? That removes the possibility of necro while outlining when it's best to make a new topic.

 

Don't know if possible, and again wouldn't always be prudent

New rule looks good to me

 

I personally feel that it would be better for newer members to bump old threads rather than have 10+ threads of the same exact topic.

 

Ok back to topic.
Well im still a newbie and it seems that all the mods follow the newbies.
I mean every single topic i post on a mod( usally Noxid) critisizes me.well usally everyone...

 

uhh

You kind of just went off-topic there

They were on-topic before you posted

why

 

And then dunk does what he does best and exacerbates the problem
I don't follow new people any more than I follow old people, it's simply the case that it's possible to read every single post on the entire forum (which I do) and new people make a lot more bad ones.

On the subject of locking threads after a set time, I agree that it wouldn't work for most sections of the forum because bumping is better than duples. I am still in favour of manual locking of threads in the mod showcase that are beyond dead with unlocks available upon request by the OP, but if I'm the only one that wants that then oh well.

 

That's a really good idea Nox.
I mean, that's what the Mods General thread is for, right? So, locking "until further notice" would encourage them to post in the right thread, especially if you link to it and say, "Further discussion will be here," or something in the thread locked post.

 

I agree, but "necrobumping", does it mean something along the lines of "posting at dead threads?"

 

Yes.

 

Necrobumping sounds vaguely illegal.

 

Only vaguely?

 

WELL, if it was full-out ILLEGAL, maybe WINDSofraacistWINDS wouldn't be alive, now would he? 99 PERCENT of all the forum posters in the world would be arrested for being ILLEGAL, by interchangeable definition of the NECRObump. 5 percent would be DEAD. Raving Madman included.

 

I'm pretty positive that Ambient Malice was referring to having sexual contact with the deceased.

 

I don't mean to spark off-topic discussion but...

..Just how is windsofwinds racist?