Necroposting
 

Necroposting means reviving essentially dead threads back to life, or at least to zombie status.

I have noticed lately some members are going back and reviving threads that are three, six, nine months, even over a year without a last post.

That is fine if you have something significant and valuable to add that makes the thread worthy of revival.

However if you are you are just saying "Yeah, I think so, too", or something that isn't groundbreaking or informative, best to let dead threads lie.

I see new users answering questions asked by users who literally haven't been on this site in over a year or more.

Look at when the first post was made, when the user was last on, and think whether or not what your are contributing will be interesting to users who are on now and whether or not you are saying anything that hasn't already been said months or even years ago.

May I ask what the harm is in necroposting? Sometimes a "Yes, I agree" could revive a very interesting thread. If however it isn't interesting, then it just... dies again! I don't see the harm?!

MMM

What about containing the same old questions?

The decision is not mine to make, but for some things, I would much rather all posts on the subject stay in the same thread.

Yeah I agree, people are always being told not to duplicate threads so I dont really see the point of this...

Oy...:glasses:

He didn't say you couldn't post ever again, lol. He's asking people to keep the useless posts on dead threads to a minimum. You say what harm does it do to post...what harm does it do to not? If someone wants to read the thread they'll read it regardless of whether or not you bump it back to the top. However, if you're actually REVIVING the thread through a statement that opens up actual discussion, that's something else entirely. *shrug* Happy posting. :pinkclap:

So... You consider "yeah, i dunno" or "i think so too" questions that are worthy of dragging up some random thread from years ago for?

Umm, okay.

If you want to say "Hey, I`m having a similar issue / problem / question" then that`s perfectly fine. No one is going to complain at all.

It`s when people just write stuff like "omg that sucks" in reply to a thread that was resolved over a year ago that it seems pretty worthless to me.

I'm my opinion every thread is alive and is no different than any other as long as it's not closed. People these days prefer only posting in the threads that are only in the first page and don't even bother to look through other pages. That's why I don't see any harm if somebody revives an old thread no matter how pointless his/her post is, for all we know, that might attract others who got more to add than "i think so too".

For instance, take the global warming thread. It's dead right now and somebody revives it by posting something like "Global warming is bad". Sure the post doesn't contribute much, but the thread is back in the first page and somebody else might notice it and contribute with a much better one that will bring the discussion back, thus making the thread alive again.

Agreed 100%

Guys, MMM isn's saying don't bring up old threads, he's saying don't do it if you're just going to say something useless like "Yeah, that's cool"

Because it's pointless....

It's also pointless in a "living" thread!! It's actually more useful in a "dead" thread because this so called pointless comment could be the spark needed to restart an interesting thread/debate which is in short supply at the moment around here.

So, unfortunately, "it's pointless" isn't a good enough reason. And before this turns into some sort of argument, I'm not bashing MMM or his decisions, I am simply not seeing a good enough reason to do what he has suggested (hence my first reply).

I guess I shouldn't be surprised by some of the reactions.

This is not a new rule, and I did not confer with other mods before posting.

I won't repeat what I wrote in my first post, although it seems some people may not have thoroughly read it.

If we agree that pointless threads are useless, why wouldn't we agree to the same on pointless posts?

"Because they may revive a dead thread and the NEXT person might write something interesting."

To me that logic seems backwards. If we imagine the front page posts are the most "alive" and the back page posts are the most "dead", when someone necroposts they revive a dead thread, but it also means the active threads get pushed down.

One newer user recently (who I PMed about it) posted a half dozen "OMG" posts on threads well buried in the back in as many minutes. So six active threads were knocked off the front page.

Another user started answering "Be my friends ads", which is fine, but to some users who had only posted once months, and in a couple cases over a year ago. Sorry, but she's not going to be your friend, and you end up looking silly.

Never would I say don't post if you have something of value to contribute, but in my opinion, if you are going to bring a thread back from the dead you should have a pretty good reason.