PDA

View Full Version : Should the "No reviving old threads" rule be abolished?



MJN SEIFER
12-13-2006, 11:32 PM
I think it should!

As many of should know, if a poster posts a reply to an old "dead" thead an admin will frown them for "reviving" a thread and then close the topic.

However there are times when inportant things need to be said on that topic - the poster may have never seen that topic and then one day s/he decides to look threw some old topics, sees something in the thread that needs to be replied to for some reason, be it personal or the answer that is needed.

Other forums I am/have been a member of actualy don't have this rule.

However a slight negative side is that when a topic reaches 30 pages (That actually happend once) it can be quite tough to find where you are.

I am in no authority but hopfuly the votes will cause the admins to reach a descision(sp?)

Christmas
12-13-2006, 11:34 PM
No

Hambone
12-13-2006, 11:34 PM
No. Once a thread is dead. It needs to remain dead, like wasps!

Bahamut2000X
12-13-2006, 11:34 PM
How can you even tell anymore? I havn't been able to find any sort of posting times/dates anymnore since I came back to the forums. And my join date vanished as well. I'm so lost without my dates anymore. T_T

sephirothishere
12-13-2006, 11:35 PM
indeed masmas.....they are old..and have already been discussed...why talk about them again...old threads are not sooo fun...

rubah
12-13-2006, 11:39 PM
The only people that say that are the ones who get fooled and told off for posting in them.

They should not be revived unless you have the best reason in the world.

White Raven
12-13-2006, 11:41 PM
I don't understand that if the gods don't want old threads to be reopened, why not just close them when they reach a certain age? :confused:

They should euthanasia them. :D

Ryth
12-13-2006, 11:43 PM
No more baby killing! :mad2:

XxSephirothxX
12-13-2006, 11:46 PM
Nah. In the vast majority of circumstances, it's better just to start a fresh discussion on the topic. Ending is better than mending. :monster:

Shlup
12-13-2006, 11:47 PM
If a thread has been revived I often don't recognize it and'll post in it again. If I'm going to repeat myself, may as well be in a fresh thread.

LunarWeaver
12-13-2006, 11:49 PM
I could revive all the hundreds of "Who is your favorite character" threads at once if it wasn't for that meddling rule.

DarkLadyNyara
12-14-2006, 12:05 AM
I am in no authority but hopfuly the votes will cause the admins to reach a descision(sp?)
I'd say that, given how long the rule's been in effect, they have reached a decision. :D

No, they shouldn't be revived. Threads die for a reason.

rubah
12-14-2006, 12:14 AM
We have better things to do than to close forty dozen threads every day, really. It's just common sense and forum ettiquette!

Tavrobel
12-14-2006, 12:19 AM
No, it should not be abolished.

edczxcvbnm
12-14-2006, 12:51 AM
Hell yeah it should. Then I could bring back 100 old threads an hour and really just piss people off.

Giga Guess
12-14-2006, 01:07 AM
The only people that say that are the ones who get fooled and told off for posting in them.

They should not be revived unless you have the best reason in the world.

Agreed. And NO I'm not sucking up!

Bunny
12-14-2006, 01:10 AM
The short answer is no.

The long answer is nope.

Xaven
12-14-2006, 01:16 AM
I am in no authority but hopfuly the votes will cause the admins to reach a descision(sp?)
I'd say that, given how long the rule's been in effect, they have reached a decision. :D

No, they shouldn't be revived. Threads die for a reason.
Yeah, that.

Rase
12-14-2006, 01:24 AM
However there are times when inportant things need to be said on that topic - the poster may have never seen that topic and then one day s/he decides to look threw some old topics, sees something in the thread that needs to be replied to for some reason, be it personal or the answer that is needed.
You could always use the handy PM system, though given how old most dead threads are the person in question probably won't remember or care anymore.

Oh, and no, I like it how it is now. It's not that hard to make a new thread about a topic.

Morningstar
12-14-2006, 01:26 AM
Nah. People would get confused.

Jojee
12-14-2006, 02:23 AM
I remember one of the times that I came back to the forums in um I dunno, 2003? I revived a bunch of old threads and then Leeza closed every single one of them and kept saying "Stop reviving old threads!" x( I felt so gyped. xD

I don't care if they rule stays or goes ^_^ Usually I'm too lazy to hit the button to go to the 2nd page even.

Zeromus_X
12-14-2006, 02:26 AM
You can just make a new topic. :) :cat:

Evastio
12-14-2006, 02:28 AM
No. Once a thread is dead. It needs to remain dead, like wasps!
What if someone is asking for help or advice? EoEO Threads should be allowed to be revived if the person still needs help.

Goldenboko
12-14-2006, 02:32 AM
No you could always make a new thread and it would get too confusing I hate when old threads are brought.

Ace Protorney
12-14-2006, 02:34 AM
I don't believe the "no reviving old threads" rule should be abolished. Some threads don't deserve to be revived, and should stay "dead" rather than be revived. If we remove that rule, we could see a whole lot of confused members seeing threads by members who no longer post here. Though, I do think the rule is silly, it's there for a reason. However, some threads can be revived, but rarely are threads allowed to stay open if revived.

Ashley Schovitz
12-14-2006, 02:41 AM
The only people that say that are the ones who get fooled and told off for posting in them.

They should not be revived unless you have the best reason in the world.

Is having no replies a good reason?

rubah
12-14-2006, 03:26 AM
If there's no replies then clearly no one wants to talk about it. Which is depressing if you're posting in the art forum ;.;

evastio has a good point, and I think that could qualify as being one of the best reasons in the world. But you could just make a new thread and refer back like zexy said.

NorthernChaosGod
12-14-2006, 08:38 AM
I don't think it should be abolished, merely changed.

If the reviver can bring a legitimate post to the table, that is still useful, insightful, and/or relevant, why not allow it?

Obviously threads that have some sort of time limit of relevance should stay dead.


And if you expect people to check dates to know when not to revive threads, why can't you expect to know that certain posts are old and that certain members no longer actively post? Sounds like quite a double standard.

Huckleberry Quin
12-14-2006, 04:33 PM
There is actually only one correct answer to this question, and that answer is no.

Madonna
12-14-2006, 04:35 PM
Hey, if you are into corpses, what is the problem?

The rule should stay in place, you sick, disturbed souls.

Huckleberry Quin
12-14-2006, 04:38 PM
Corpses struggle less.

abrojtm
12-14-2006, 04:40 PM
It should <i>maybe</i> be amended in the forums that don't get as much action as, say, GC; otherwise--no.

Timerk
12-14-2006, 05:05 PM
I don't understand that if the gods don't want old threads to be reopened, why not just close them when they reach a certain age? :confused:

starseeker
12-14-2006, 06:01 PM
Rules exist for a reason. The thread necromancy rule exists the keep threads in the forum relevant.

Bunny
12-14-2006, 06:07 PM
Rules exist for a reason. The thread necromancy rule exists the keep threads in the forum relevant.

Threadcomancy!

I don't understand the problem. Usually if you can't find the post on the first three pages it is fair game to repost the topic with your own added flair. Make it yours, people!

Bart's Friend Milhouse
12-14-2006, 06:51 PM
So when exactly is a thread considered old?

Huckleberry Quin
12-14-2006, 06:52 PM
Whenever people stop posting in it for a month. :bigsmile:

Jess
12-14-2006, 07:10 PM
If the thread is dead and you wish to discuss the topic of it, why don't you just make a new thread? :jess:

Burtsplurt
12-14-2006, 07:31 PM
I think it's a pretty pointless rule. :)

I know of one forum that forbids making a new thread for a topic that has already been discussed. Equally as pointless.

Yamaneko
12-14-2006, 07:39 PM
Might want to fight the powers that be in another manner, kid.

Mirage
12-14-2006, 07:44 PM
We have better things to do than to close forty dozen threads every day, really. It's just common sense and forum ettiquette!
I'm sure it could be automated :p