Thread resurrection.

[esoxlucius]

This isn't something that happens on a regular basis, nor when it does happen does it cause any trouble, but I think it's worth discussing.

New members who are unfamiliar with the site, on occasion, if they are browsing through the archives resurrect threads that can sometimes be over 10 years old! You don't always spot it straight away, you just realise that all of a sudden we seem to have a load of new names in a thread. And then you check the dates and realise that all these "new" names are indeed past members who many are not active, and haven't been for years.

Usually the response is pretty quick, along the lines of, "do you realise how old this thread is" type of reply.

Do we even think this is something that should be looked at? If for example someone raises a thread that is let's say, 12 months or older, maybe a prompt automatically comes up on screen asking if they want to continue posting on the thread even though it is "X" years old, and that many of the original participants may not be active?

 

[deeda]

I don't think it is important enough to warrant an automatic prompt to the person posting IMO. I usually either respond to the member's post to briefly note they may not get a response, answer their question quickly if it's on topic and then Report so a Mod can split to a separate topic so as to not 'muddy' the older original topic.

 

[Niki_up]

This isn't something that happens on a regular basis, nor when it does happen does it cause any trouble, but I think it's worth discussing.

New members who are unfamiliar with the site, on occasion, if they are browsing through the archives resurrect threads that can sometimes be over 10 years old! You don't always spot it straight away, you just realise that all of a sudden we seem to have a load of new names in a thread. And then you check the dates and realise that all these "new" names are indeed past members who many are not active, and haven't been for years.

Usually the response is pretty quick, along the lines of, "do you realise how old this thread is" type of reply.

Do we even think this is something that should be looked at? If for example someone raises a thread that is let's say, 12 months or older, maybe a prompt automatically comes up on screen asking if they want to continue posting on the thread even though it is "X" years old, and that many of the original participants may not be active?

I agree a prompt would be nice! I have even liked or commented on a really old thread only to realize afterwards it’s old. Or spent time reading a page of information before I realized it was old and solutions to the problem are not actually needed haha

 

[Adamson]

Although many forums and even reddit archive threads, making them read-only; I have never minded old threads being posted in.

 

[Dalfrey86]

There is some value in bringing up an old thread. For instance cycling and matters related to ick have been paramount to my success in the hobby. Sure I'm new and won't expect the thread to magically come to life, but there is some aspect of updating old methods with today's lessons that's important. IMO

 

[bobblehead27]

Maybe grey the old posts out or fade them so you can easily distinguish where the older posts in the thread are vs new posts at a glance. Say if a post is over a year old make it faded where if it's newer just leave it as is. Because there are rare occasions where an older posts will be reactivated for a reason. Like maybe the op had to put a project on the back burner while working but now was ready to jump back in.

 

[Hendre]

I have no issue with old threads being pulled up for X or Y reasons. Just when someone asks for an update from a member that hasn't been on in years it becomes a little iffy, I personally don't think it's necessary to have a system in place to prevent "necro" threads

 

[Gourami Swami]

I don't think the automated warning is needed; like you said usually somebody tells them pretty quick that they should start a new thread if it's a "necro". I dont mind people posting in older threads either if they add something to the conversation or bring up a new point. The only time it is bothersome at all to me is if somebody adds a completely new or not entirely related question, which would warrant it's own new thread.

 

[fishhead0103666]

I believe certain threads should be locked unless there is new news regarding the topic that warrants it to be unlocked. Take this thread for example

Are micro-chipped/certified Asian arowanas OK in the US?

Some one gona get arrested lolz

www.monsterfishkeepers.com

Thread is several years old about the legality of asian arowanas, it is a commonly known fact that they are illegal in the us, a new member replied stating they are illegal, I have reported the thread to try to get it locked to prevent further unnecessary comments like those. The only time a thread like that needs to have a new comment is when a bill is up for vote that might make them legal again or they have become legal once more.

 

[Hendre]

I believe certain threads should be locked unless there is new news regarding the topic that warrants it to be unlocked. Take this thread for example

Are micro-chipped/certified Asian arowanas OK in the US?

Some one gona get arrested lolz

www.monsterfishkeepers.com

Thread is several years old about the legality of asian arowanas, it is a commonly known fact that they are illegal in the us, a new member replied stating they are illegal, I have reported the thread to try to get it locked to prevent further unnecessary comments like those. The only time a thread like that needs to have a new comment is when a bill is up for vote that might make them legal again or they have become legal once more.

People post information every few months, such as that on various scams etc. If anything regarding the information in the thread changes it can be edited, but otherwise it will stay open for now.