[quote:7df8a8d304="Hsing"]There's one thing I've always wanted to ask though - when does it start being thread necromancy? Where is the expire date? Sometimes interesting discussions float back on the screen, an issue turns up again... - revive old threads, and explain why, or make a new one?[/quote:7df8a8d304] This has been discussed at odd times in the past, without any firm conclusion being drawn, and with differing opinions expressed. Given the way we have traditionally frowned on people needlessly creating threads on subjects that have been discussed before, I think it's hypocritical to object to bumping old threads. I think it's absolutely fine to bump old threads, but it's worth saying that that's what you've done to alert the unaware to the fact that the thread is an old one, and to forestall queries over whether or not you yourself were aware.
in the past, we've scolded people for bumping old threads instead of starting new ones, and starting new threads instead of bumping old ones. i think the only real solution is just to hide under a blanket and pretend you never thought of saying anything in the first place.
[quote:61fb7946f1="Bradthewonderllama"]You humans ARE a strange people.[/quote:61fb7946f1] So what are you Brad? Oops sorry I forgot that llamas are really the superior race. All hale llamas.
[quote:8bd3785909="Garner"]in the past, we've scolded people for bumping old threads instead of starting new ones, and starting new threads instead of bumping old ones. i think the only real solution is just to hide under a blanket and pretend you never thought of saying anything in the first place.[/quote:8bd3785909] We're gonna be needing a really BIG blanket... The only point I was remarking on was that the thread was bumped up not for its original subject, but for the hijack that occured halfway through it, which was strange. In this kind of case, I would go for a new thread with a link to the hijacked one, preferably at the place the relevant hijack took place... Like Angua did (with a little help from her friends :cooler: ) but without the link bit... In general, I'd say it depends on the subject of the thread which defines its bumpability... Hey, here's an idea, to save on birthday threads, we could just bump up last years, and then all the people who had already posted on them wouldn't have to bother posting again
[quote:868cc097ac="Garner"]in the past, we've scolded people for bumping old threads instead of starting new ones, and starting new threads instead of bumping old ones. i think the only real solution is just to hide under a blanket and pretend you never thought of saying anything in the first place.[/quote:868cc097ac] Facepunch Forums have an auto-lock system after 3 months or so, perhaps that would be a good idea. If it really something important to say (and I'm using the Ridcully method here) it wouldn't be too much trouble to PM a sweeper asking for thread reopening.
Hm. Automated solutions seem not to be "our" general stile. Can't put that in rational arguments right now, though. Also, I would have had to ask Mal to unlock the "Chain Diary" thread at least once, if i remember correctly. Katcals last suggestion sounded fine to me, actually. That would be a good, flexible way to handle old threads.
[quote:6043c75b97="Hsing"]Katcals last suggestion sounded fine to me, actually. That would be a good, flexible way to handle old threads.[/quote:6043c75b97] You mean the lazy one about re-using birthday threads ? Yay :cooler:
The problem with locking old threads is that this would force newbies to create new threads for old subjects, which this community used to find extremely annoying. At least if an old thread is available, a new person can see what opinions were expressed before rather than wondering why no one seems to care about the interesting idea they've just raised.
