WHY do revived threads get closed?

This has to be the single most annoying thing in forums in general.

So there's something you want to discuss and can't wait to get onto the forum, the only viable means of discussing something with people across the world.

You make a topic just to get it closed because oops! someone has already posted this before.

So you go to the original topic to add your input and hope to start a fresh new tangent on the subject, but...oops again! reviving old threads is bad, and it gets closed.

Needless to say, I'm pissed off at how many threads I can't post in due to the "revival" and when making a new thread is frowned upon, what can I do?

Is that subject supposed to not be discussed EVER again? Were people only allowed to talk about it for a week or so, and after inactivity it can no longer be brought up because it will be closed?

So maybe someone has already made your point within the thread. THAT isn't the point. YOU should be able to express YOUR thoughts on something no matter if they are similar to the other 5 guys before you, because it makes you feel like you were a part of that topic and that you're in the same boat as the other people in the thread.

Your thread will only be closed if there is already an active topic on the matter. If not, it won't be closed. I have yet to see an instance where what you described proved to be true.

*sighs* Here's the idea.

Mods will often close a thread that's been revived after a lengthy period of time of inactivity. Depending on the mod, if the reply was on-topic, the chances of the thread staying alive is pretty good. If it's pointless and spam, you can bet your booty it will get closed.

Now, each staff member have a different idea of the period it took from the last post to the most recent reply. If it's greater than a month or so, the chances of the staff member closing the thread is greater than if it was within a month.

So, it all comes down to the period of inactivity. If it's greater than two months and/or the thread is in or past the third page of the forum, it will get closed. That also goes with making new threads on a similar topic of the older thread, if you can find the thread within the first two pages of the forum, it's safe to reply. If not, you can go ahead a start a new thread.

Just check the first or second page for the topic you want. The reason we don't allow revived threads is because those discussions had already run their course, and they push newer topics aside that may have not yet gotten their due. If you post a duplicate topic and it gets closed, the mod should link you to the other thread. It's not a big deal and you don't get in trouble for it.

Yes, that is annoying.

They're annoying because I see them and sometimes post in them without realize I posted in them several months ago, and then I have to stab a baby to feel better about life.

Baby killer. :(

The Eyes on Final Fantasy Staff: Saving babies since 1999

Yeah good points everyone.

I guess I would have liked, for example, the "MP3 Requests" thread to stay open in the music forum, because I think having a central thread where people could discuss their collections and make exchanges would have been great. I would have liked to have posted in it but it was closed due to being revived.

But I completely understand what you're saying ..Agent Proto and Del Murder made the best points and made me feel better about the topic. At first I ws just really pissed off so I felt the need to leave feedback as a testament to my rage and anger! Roaarrrr

If we were just allowed to revive threads, this place would be worse than an episode of Dragon Ball Z.

I'll see you all in a couple of months when I revive this thread ok

Maybe your threads should suck less.

Yeah, I'm not a good PR guy, what can I say.

Say yes to me lovely!

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

They're annoying because I see them and sometimes post in them without realize I posted in them several months ago, and then I have to stab a baby to feel better about life.

---

Why would you do that. Don't you see the arrow/black dot on the post icon on the forum letting you know you posted in the thread already?!@4ke1r MONKEY smurfEDDAGvd ,/FDv *BOOMUBrf*

You already know quite well just how stupid I am, ed; you don't have to rub it in.

lol, shlup's dumb.

What about new members who want to have something to say on a topic that has attracted their attention, only to find the thread they've contributed to has been locked in the next posting.

Surely if a thread has naturally "died" once from lack of interest, who's to say it won't just die again, there shoudn't be any need for this sort of euthanasia...

This is the only forum I know of where threads are deliberately locked simply because of age.

Quote:

---

This is the only forum I know of where threads are deliberately locked simply because of age.

---

...and that's supposed to matter, why?

Thsi is the only big forum I know of that isn't complete crap, too. So they must be doing something right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Light Mage

What about new members who want to have something to say on a topic that has attracted their attention, only to find the thread they've contributed to has been locked in the next posting.

---

Could someone answer THAT question? Light Mage pretty much asked the exact question I was trying to get across.

Do the mods only support old or veteran posters? Are new posters not allowed to interrupt the tranquility of old topics simply because they were before their time? New members should get to share their opinion on any topic, new or old, so long as it is somewhat original and personal and adds something of substance to the topic.

if you post in an old thread and then it gets closed for being too old, just make a new topic to discuss it. The problem with reviving old threads is suddenly somebody new is quoting and responding to something I said about the topic 15 months ago that I don't even remember saying anymore. Muchg easier to start a new topic and get fresh answers.

alternatively, if you want to post in a topic, and you see it's an old topic, just make a new topic to begin with.

Besides, there is a thing called necroposting, which is like reviving a "dead" thread. Most of the time, the dead threads are located on page 3 and higher in the forums. Why the staff dislike it when someone revives a "dead" thread, is because, as eest said, you're bringing up the past. It's even more annoying if you bring up a post from... LAST year. As eest said, you can start a new thread about an old topic that you found that has been "dead" for several months. You may still get the same answers as the older thread, but you'll also get some fresh answers from other members who haven't posted in the other thread. So it's a Win-Win situation!

First, you're not reviving an old thread, second, you're getting fresh and new responses, and you're also likely to get the same responses from the members who posted in the older thread, so it works out.

Proto, referring to page numbers doesn't mean much because everyone has their threads per page set to a different number. Mine are at 100, while someone else might be much lower. That's why age is more important to me than what page they found the thread in.

Of course, Leeza, but majority of the posters use the default setting, so that's what I'm going for. I'm sorry for any confusion for the others who are using a different setting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raistlin

...and that's supposed to matter, why?

---

I was merely making an observation based on my own experience.

Just be glad this place isn't ultra strict about old threads. I know of a forum that will close a thread revived that was found in the SECOND page.

Have any of you ever looked at a certain forum belonging to a certain site pertaining to a certain movie sequal to Final Fantasy VII? That may or may not end in .net?

Those people are power abusing mod-monsters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agent Proto

Besides, there is a thing called necroposting, which is like reviving a "dead" thread.

---

There are other definitions for Necroposting, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necronopticous

There are other definitions for Necroposting, too.

---

And a fine example of one.

This really shouldn't be that big of an issue. If you want to discuss an old topic, make a new one. We are never going to close a thread because you are discussing something that was discussed long ago. If someone bumps an old thread, we will close it and tell them not to do it again. They aren't going to be in trouble or anything (unless of course they continue to do it after being told not to.)