reviving old threads


PDA






Tirod
June 10, 2014, 09:44 AM
They get found, a reply is posted, and sometimes we miss that last posting date. Or it's a continuing conversation - some threads reappear over years. One I like on a forum is the "Don't post in this thread" which gets new life about every 8 to 14 months. There are some really old posts that date back to the beginning of the internet.

Does that mean we should never revive them - ever? Seems if that was the point, the software would just archive the posts after a certain time, and that is what happens in other forums. No further additions after a set number of calendar units.

Since that doesn't seem to be common, should we take it that we can revive a thread? No rules or software to prevent it, yet we see mods lock them. If the additional posts are on topic and there's no drift - why not let them run? Just because the thread has a delay in response for one, two years or longer doesn't mean the topic has died - and suggesting a new thread should be started then just duplicates some responses in answer that were already covered (if people would just read thru the thread.)

The situation seems ambiguous. If we aren't supposed to revive a thread, why is the door left open, and if the opportunity exists, why slam the door shut?

Don't expect an immediate resolution, just food for thought. Expecting the average forum member to check the date isn't working, and leaving it open to further posts means it should be expected.

If you enjoyed reading about "reviving old threads" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Sam1911
June 10, 2014, 09:57 AM
It is a bit ambiguous. Some forums have an "ALWAYS BETTER TO POST IN AN EXISTING THREAD!!!" rule, others like this one, that only applies to fairly current, active threads.

What we tell folks is this:

Times change, and the answer given in this thread may no longer be the "right" answer. Technology, market forces, the regulatory environment and culture have probably all changed, for better or worse. The price when this was posted is probably not the price now. The laws then may not be law today. The user who recommended the product or service now has 858 days more experience with it and may not have the same opinion today that he did then.

Please only post if you think doing so makes more sense than starting a new thread.

That's not so terribly controversial, but we made it a function that the poster has to click to acknowledge that message before posting because so many folks didn't seem to realize how old the thread really was in many cases.

Unfortunately, what happens dozens of times is that someone surfing the 'net stumbles onto that 10 year old thread and decides to join here just to reply, and clicks through that warning without really considering it (or just because, having gone to all the trouble of registering, they're going to have their say, dammit!) and that puts the warning message to sleep again -- so now the thread looks current and folks start arguing with the original poster who's been gone, and maybe even deceased, for 10 years.

So we ask folks to decide if it really makes much sense to debate that topic in the context of a thread that's been dormant for more than a year. Sometimes an update to an old thread is exactly the right thing to do. Sometimes it is clearly more logical to start a new conversation.

Sometimes the Staff doesn't agree with the choice and locks the thread and says "go start a new one." That's ok. No harm, no foul. There's no infraction or penalty for that. Just us doing what we feel we need to to keep the conversations relevant, logical, and of the highest value.

taliv
June 10, 2014, 03:18 PM
yeah, i actually like to see old threads updated with new info. and i don't lock them very often. the ones i close are usually, "what brand should i buy?" type threads where some half-value knucklehead comes along 3 years later and says something less than insightful.

tirod, feel free to revive old threads if you have something interesting to say, which you often do

BullfrogKen
June 10, 2014, 11:40 PM
Complete agreement with Tom & Sam on the position.

Helpful question to ask yourself when resurrecting and old thread -

Are you adding more value or information to a conversation that left loose strings, unanswered questions, or some important new insight?

Or are you just posting to offer your opinion to a thread already full of opinions?

Tirod
June 12, 2014, 12:28 PM
Or are you just posting to offer your opinion to a thread already full of opinions?

Well, gee, of course. Somebody on the internet is wrong and needs additional guidance to form their halfbaked opinion. :rolleyes:

I do understand the guidance - after a year, and if you actually have something of any real worth to add. I did that today - ran across a necrothread from 5 years ago on a forum, and responded with the information I had been researching. There had been little in response, even when it was current, about what would be needed to accomplish the goal of the OP.

Most of the time it's a race to get a post in ahead of a Moderator's finger pressing the big LOCK button. I've had it happen a lot while composing a reply - the system just looks at me like, you want to do what? Refresh and the padlock is up.

My advancing age has left me with a counterplan - I wake up a lot more before 6:30 now, time enough to find that thread just waiting for all the knowledge dripping from my fingertips. :D My score IBTL is going up!

9mmepiphany
June 12, 2014, 12:37 PM
That sounds familiar, yup it was me

I admit to not reading your post before closing it and defaulted to the 1 year rule of thumb. I actually thought your post was pretty informative, but it was buried on page 4.

That is why I suggested you start a new thread. If you'd like I could move it to it's own thread...which I also would have done if you'd sent me a PM asking me to do that.

What would you like the thread title to be?

SnowBlaZeR2
June 12, 2014, 08:20 PM
Most of the time it's a race to get a post in ahead of a Moderator's finger pressing the big LOCK button. I've had it happen a lot while composing a reply - the system just looks at me like, you want to do what? Refresh and the padlock is up.

My advancing age has left me with a counterplan - I wake up a lot more before 6:30 now, time enough to find that thread just waiting for all the knowledge dripping from my fingertips. My score IBTL is going up!

This seems to happen to me every time I visit the site. If I see a mod currently viewing the thread, I typically just move on to something else. :D

Twiki357
June 24, 2014, 02:52 AM
I don’t think that I’ve been guilty of any revivals, but I do enjoy reading some of them.

What I would like to see (And I don’t know if it is possible or practical) is for the original date of the OP’s post next to his/her name. Many posts show as current because there has been a reply posted today, but the original OP’s post was a week, a month, or?? ago. I don’t know how many times I’ve clicked on a current day post, usually with a very ambiguous title line, only to find out again (It’s called a senior moment) that the subject is of no interest to me.

Midwest
June 24, 2014, 08:33 AM
I think the record for oldest thread revival is this one

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=1160

"ATF Serial Number Database"

It was about some ATF link that is able to trace serial numbers of firearms. The original link just doesn't go anywhere. The original thread dates back to December 30 2002 ! Thanks Frank for mercifully closing the thread. :-)

.

If you enjoyed reading about "reviving old threads" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!