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.

MMM, for an "active" thread to be pushed back the way you're describing, it'd quiet a few necroposts from quiet a few "dead" threads... And by a few, I mean A LOT!!!

I'm sorry, Noodle, I am not following you.

The only thing dumber then reviving a weak thread is arguing about whether or not it is ethical :rolleyes:

Aren't you exaggerating a little bit?
After reading this I understand you think that most of the members on JF read threads only the first page and don't even bother to look at the second one. Well let me tell you that you're wrong here, and people who go several pages back to revive the old threads prove that.

So? The whole J-music forum is filled with "OMG" and other pointless posts, but I don't see the mods of that section complain about that.

Just because one member revived six old threads pushing the active ones out, doesn't mean the same thing is gonna happen everyday. There's is always a member now and then who makes several pointless threads or posts in less then half hour.

Don't think you're the only one who noticed that. The only thing I can suggjest is - once a year delete all the old threads in the "Be my friends ads" leaving only the last four pages. That way less people make fools out of themselves.

No. Six pointless necroposts pushes six active threads off the front page. No exaggeration.

I don't mind if people only look at the front page, or if they go back to older posts.
I am not sure how this is an argument against reviving dead threads with "OMG" posts. Even you say those points are "pointless", so I wonder why doing something to reduce that number would be such a bad idea.
And that is exactly who my first post is directed at.
That happens. The intention of this thread is to also help make less people make fools out of themselves.

Um, because he is a mod, and he has authority over all of us is a good enough reason.

Guys, just stop complaining about it, who cares. It's simple, just don't bring up dead threads for no reason. It's not rocket science. Just don't do it. God.

If MMM was the kind of mod that done as he pleased without thinking of JF's best interests, I'm sure he wouldn't be a Mod. He isn't a Dictator!!! He's simply trying to improve JF and to do so, input from JF users is key!

Thank you, Noodle. You speak the truth.

Let's be honest. No-one should ever just post something along the lines of "Yes, I agree" or anything that you mentioned in a currently active topic nevermind a dead/resolved topic.

It's a pretty simple concept; Post something of worth, no matter what topic it is.

There's always one.

Let remind you that half of JF is filled with kiddies from age 13-16, and you barely see any intellectual posts from them. So you better get use to "OMG", "LOL", "ROFL", and other annoying, pointless, one line posts, because that will never change.

This situation is completely different to any other topic, why? Because we're discussing the consequences of it. The only reason a conversation has sparked because of you saying "Yeah - I agree" is completely different in any other topic.

Therefore, whatever point you are trying to make is really pointless.

And if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump off, too?

Is it you are really resistant to attempts at improvements, or do you just like to take the opposite opinion of logic?

There is nothing in my first post or in my intentions that is in the least bit offensive to logic and common sense. Some people come here strictly for the sake of honing their arguing skills, which is what I sense is happening on this thread.

Necroposting is a bad habit. It does NOT help. If you just want to post 'I agree' keep it for yourself, nobody needs that. Helps reviving an interesting thread? Hell no, why are you reviving it for others? If others want to give their opinion on that thread they should search it themselves, but necroposting on it is useless.

I feel ashamed some people here consider it helping. It's just SPAM disguised in another form.

Why? Well, some people like to hear different opinions... Most of the time I spend on JF is reading. I don't always reply to things, but I do like reading what people have to say. So, reviving a thread is good for that. And people don't always realise that a thread exists. I don't search for a thread to reply in. I see the front page, if the thread interests me, then I reply! The same thing will happen if a thread is revived! It will be seen by people, if anyone has an opinion, they will reply, if noone has an opinion, it will die again. At most, it will take up the front page for a couple of hours.:rolleyes: Where is the harm in that?

Nope, but if you jumped, then I'd definitely jumped too, because if the 'always right' MMM decided to jump, that would mean there's something WRONG with me for not wanting to jump.

Resistant to attempts at improvements?
And what kind of improvements are you talking about, besides creating a thread about necroposting like it's some big deal?


This isn't like that thread where you were asking people to use less profanities, I agree to some degree there. But this is different, it has something useful in it, and just because if seems a backward logic to YOU, well then, it's your problem not mine.

Did you read my post in the first page? If not, read it, and you'll see that there is something good in it.
Not everyone here has lots of time on their hands, they don't bother to spend it by browsing through the old pages looking for an interesting topic, they just look and post in the most active ones. But If someone who has more time brings back the old threads to them, then I don't care what they wrote, all that matters to me is to see the forum being alive again even if it's for a short time.

Uh...
this.

Sure, if a month old post is brought back from the dead only to contain "I agree, you're a poop mouth," it might put a damper on my day. Said damper lasts for only 2 seconds, and I get on with my life.

Your argument failed when you said you don't care what people post. Why bother wasting 3 seconds of your life on a dead thread that nobody cares about, and in turn wasting everyone else's time. If you have something valid to add, then great, if you don't then it's just a waste, like in any other thread. Are you just disagreeing for the sake of it now? Common logic says that asking people to make posts meaningful is a good thing.

I'm not sure what's worse: arguing over clear-cut forum etiquette or intelligent people arguing over clear-cut forum etiquette.

Either way, it makes for great theatre.

So they have time to spend on arguing on that topic, and not to browse old pages?

If a thread has become inactive, it came to a point nobody has to add anything anymore... or nobody needs. If that someone has something so special to say, he should browse, search or whatever and not expect Necroposters to bring inactive threads to life.

Contrary to you, when I see an inactive thread being revived, and I had posted in there, and I check out and the last post is just 'I agree'... it just pisses me off. No contribution is just plain useless. Bumping a thread is prohibited in most big forum communities and you should be aware of that.

This post just proves that you didn't bother reading my and noodles posts in the beginning, otherwise you'd understand what I meant by saying that I don't care what they write. Just because you don't care about the dead threads, it doesn't mean that everyone here has the same opinion as you.

Common logic? You can ask them, hell, you can create a thread or make a rule asking people to make meaningful posts, but this is a forum, in case you forgot, people join everyday, but if they don't bother to read the rules when they join, then why do you think they'll bother to read something that asks them to do something they might not/don't like.

Oh, not you, please don't jump into conclusions.

I take it as your opinion, but I don't agree with it. Like I stated in first post, if a thread isn't closed it's still active no matter how old it is. To me reviving an old thread with the 'I agree' post is the same as posting 'I agree' in an active one that is in the first page.



I gave a good example of how necroposting is might prove useful, but I don't see any good examples of why is it bad besides the 'I pisses me off when I see a revived thread with a pointless post' and MMM's silly argument that necroposts push the active threads into the second page.

Anytime you use the "I don't have time" argument on JF the argument is a fail. Japan Forum itself is a time filler. If you don't have time to do things properly on Japan Forum, what are you doing here in the first place?

This is your "good example" argument from the first page. You yourself said those posts are pointless. I am afraid anything beyond that is moot, because you are making the argument FOR pointless posts, which just simply doesn't fly.

Sadly, I am starting to see the answer to this question.

There were some good arguments...and some extreme cases of trolling either way...this thread has started to look something like this:

[quote=MMM;675582]This is your "good example" argument from the first page. You yourself said those posts are pointless. I am afraid anything beyond that is moot, because you are making the argument FOR pointless posts, which just simply doesn't fly.

Thank you for 'jumping on my neck' just because I tried to say it politely instead of using the word 'pointless' again. You want so much I can go and edit my post by changing the second bolded line in the the word 'pointless'. But even if I change it now, my argument does not. But if you say that my argument is pointless, yours is even more pointless. In fact I'm starting to believe that this whole thread was just your way to nag just because someone revived six old threads, and all this arguing is because you don't want to admit that you're wrong. Sadly, even now, I was hoping to see a good argument from you or somebody else that would change my opinion about necroposting, but all see is people picking on every word I wrote, while excluding the main point I'm trying say.
So tell me MMM, who really did fail?

PS: You didn't tell me about your attempts at improvements.

Jumping on your neck? I made no personal attacks, Aniki.

I never said your argument was "pointless". I said it was "moot" because you are advocating for pointless posts. For your argument to work one must agree that pointless posts are not pointless. I cannot agree to that.

It was a pattern of behavior I saw more than once. Enough times, I felt, to merit a thread.

All this arguing is me beating a dead horse while I put off doing more important things.

The point of the thread was not to win or lose, it was to open discussion about a phenomenon I thought was worth addressing.

But if the logic that posting pointless posts on dead threads is not a good idea wasn't made clear enough, then I guess I failed.

I don't tell you a lot of the things I do, Aniki.

This is totally blown out of proportion.

If you feel the need to argue about such a simple concept, you have some issues you need to argue within yourself.

Wrong, closed and inactive are two different terms. Threads get closed because of massive SPAM, flaming or off-topic. Inactive is when a thread is open but hasn't been replied for a long time... but you can still reply. The problem is what to reply there. Necroposting won't help. If someone wants so much to talk about something, he/she will post a new topic and then will find that and older post exists (it happened to me), then giving his argument on that post.


By your way of thinking, we need members who only necropost and contribute none of their opinions to the community... just to go around and bump old threads because they like to. Those threads became inactive for a reason, if someone is so interested to share his argument and revive it yea, but in no way should someone bump a topic and WAIT for others opinions... I don't get the point in all this.

No, but you attacked my post (by saying attacked I mean you attacked the structure of my sentences, not the meaning of the post itself).

I'm not trying to convince people that pointless posts are not pointless. I'm trying to show that not all posts can be pointless no matter how pointless they be to others. Just like life, laws, behaviour, etc. has some exceptions, JF is no different, and my argument is a perfect example of an exception, which might prove of some small benefit to others.

Yes it might be right, you've been here for more than a year, but from the time I joined not once I saw a person reviving six dead threads in a small amount of time. Three dead thread was the maximum, and that happened once or twice.

I admit I started arguing, but I only did that because I didn't see any good arguments from you or others. This is one of those times when I must stand up for what I believe is better.

I not asking you to tell everything you do. I just want to know what the those improvements about necroposting you were talking about. It's not a big secret is it?