Digging up old files

[Chardris]

I have noticed that many people (without realizing) pull up old disscusions. For you people who don't know how old that conversation was, check the green bar at the top of the last post. If its a month old, maybe post something but I would go against it. The reason why I say this is because our hard-working administrators have enough to deal with on this site without having to delete old threads.




Just doing my part to improve the site.


P.S. If there is a thread that already says this, please delete this thread.

[cmgames]

It is always a balancing act, though. Some folks will jump down your throat for starting new threads about things where there are multiple old threads dealing with the matter in question. On the other hand, if none of those old threads precisely answers your new concern/question, is it better to revive a thread that already covers most of the ground that you need a clarification on? Or to start a new thread and weather the ire of the grumblers?

I've never quite worked out which is the better course, though I tend to the necro course - the grumbles I get that way tend more toward the amused than the irate.

~Z

[Agent Minivann]

I have noticed that many people (without realizing) pull up old disscusions. For you people who don't know how old that conversation was, check the green bar at the top of the last post. If its a month old, maybe post something but I would go against it. The reason why I say this is because our hard-working administrators have enough to deal with on this site without having to delete old threads.

For the most part I agree. At the same time I would rather have an old thread come back with a relevant post than a new thread with nothing that is really new. And threads usually don't get deleted unless there is good reason (spam, questionable content, or the Tavern). I think a more appropriate recommendation would be to not post in an older thread unless there is something new you can add, and search for something similar before starting a new thread.

[Fuzzie Fuzz]

In my opinion, posting in a new thread is almost always better than starting a new one that says the same thing. However, bringing back old topics can be fine if you do it only when you actually have something to add to the conversation.

[Pumpkin_King]

Yeah, if you have something to add, it's fine. That's why I try to find threads that are worth excavating in the Necropost otW.

[IAmBatman]

If you stay on this board long enough you'll see that most topics about this game that can be covered have been covered. If you want to talk about it, better to resurrect an old thread than start another one on the same topic.

[Cavalier]

But, if you do dig up an old thread, don't just say, "cool" or "yeah" or answer a question that was asked two years ago.

[Chardris]

I think the main problem is new users don't even realize that old threads are old. They just see a cool thread and continue the disscusion. I do agree about ressurecting an old thread if you have something that will actually add to the conversation.

[Junge Roman]

I would have much preferred that one of the old threads about this topic had been resurrected...

[1Mmirg]

For what it is worth, I prefer seeing an old thread come back (with a meaningful comment, as Cav said), then a new thread that just repeats what has been said before.

That said, I have in a few cases chosen to start a new thread even when an old one(s) existed, because I wanted to change the discussion in some way and felt a fresher start was warranted.

However, I don't believe I have ever done that without also (A) making a link to the older thread(s) and (B) saying something speecific about why I was resurrecting an old topic in a new thread. (An example of this, btw, is in my sig, about new members and "positive posting.")

Just starting a new thread without looking to see what has been said on the topic before, well, that seems to me like a poor choice. My two cents.