Should the "No reviving old threads" rule be abolished?

[Quindiana Jones]

Corpses struggle less.

[abrojtm]

It should <i>maybe</i> be amended in the forums that don't get as much action as, say, GC; otherwise--no.

[Timerk]

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?

[starseeker]

Rules exist for a reason. The thread necromancy rule exists the keep threads in the forum relevant.

[Bunny]

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]

So when exactly is a thread considered old?

[Quindiana Jones]

Whenever people stop posting in it for a month.

[Jess]

If the thread is dead and you wish to discuss the topic of it, why don't you just make a new thread?

[Burtsplurt]

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]

Might want to fight the powers that be in another manner, kid.

[Mirage]

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