Re-viving good and interesting topics

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You can revive any topic you like, but we have a rule against replying to threads that have been inactive for more than thirty days. There is nothing to prevent you from starting a new thread on the same topic.

And to be fair, you HAVE been informally advised about it before. I suspect that part of the reason for your warnings is that you chose to ignore that advice.

Boru

As a said before: I did not "choose to ignore" a warning.
I did not see any.

--------------

That said - can somebody tell me what "harm" is done by re-viving an "old" thread, however old it might be?

---

When there are 3 different aspects to  a case it is a good idea to have 3 threads.
No need to be personally insulting because of it.

It seems warnings are given here for un-importent  small formalities.
How boring!
But not for  grave personal insults.
That is the wrong way round.

And:
It seems some "atheists" are more into stupid little formalities than some religions!

My, we are having ourselves a little moan, aren’t we?

Follow the rules, and you never need worry about being banned or even warned.

Boru

[Ranjr]

In the old days, back in the aughts, forums encouraged users to avoid starting new threads when there was an existing thread of the same topic.  "Use the search feature," mods would say.  I share Dundee's confusion though not his consternation.

[Rhizomorph13]

In the old days, back in the aughts, forums encouraged users to avoid starting new threads when there was an existing thread of the same topic.  "Use the search feature," mods would say.  I share Dundee's confusion though not his consternation.

This has always baffled me about all things forumy. I've seen people virtually foam at the mouth because someone does/doesn't necro a post. There seems to be no winning the internets. On this forum when you are about to post in an old thread there is a warning against that action. In almost all other online communities people will mock you for starting a new thread when the issue has already been addressed in another thread. This makes more sense because if you start a new thread you will most likely go through all the same beats as the old thread so people would rather you read through old threads to be familiar with the topic.

[LadyForCamus]

Re-viving good and interesting topics is an advantage for a forum.
One should be congratulated for it.
And not getting  a warning.

That spoils the pleasure of writing in a forum.
If the staff is waiting all the time for such a dumb excuse to issue a warning.

If you want a fresh conversation about an interesting subject it’s best to start a new thread; not unearth a thread that died years ago, when many of the participants are probably not even here anymore. Hence the rule.

[GrandizerII]

Not all, but in many cases, necroing in a forum like this is annoying, for a dozen reasons. One reason is it's easy to miss the date the thread was created and to respond to those who posted in it at the time without keeping in mind that perhaps their views have changed on stuff relevant to the topic.

[Angrboda]

You can revive any topic you like, but we have a rule against replying to threads that have been inactive for more than thirty days. There is nothing to prevent you from starting a new thread on the same topic.

And to be fair, you HAVE been informally advised about it before. I suspect that part of the reason for your warnings is that you chose to ignore that advice.

Boru

As a said before: I did not "choose to ignore" a warning.
I did not see any.

--------------

That said - can somebody tell me what "harm" is done by re-viving an "old" thread, however old it might be?

One of the problems in reviving an old thread is that many of the posts may be by members who are no longer with the forum. People end up spending a lot of time replying to dead people to no good end. If you start fresh with a new thread, this doesn't happen. You can always link to the old thread in your new thread.

[Ranjr]

One of the problems in reviving an old thread is that many of the posts may be by members who are no longer with the forum.  People end up spending a lot of time replying to dead people to no good end.  If you start fresh with a new thread, this doesn't happen.  You can always link to the old thread in your new thread.

Since a large part of my liberal arts education was "replying to dead people," it's a hard habit to break.

[The Valkyrie]

One of the problems in reviving an old thread is that many of the posts may be by members who are no longer with the forum.  People end up spending a lot of time replying to dead people to no good end.  If you start fresh with a new thread, this doesn't happen.  You can always link to the old thread in your new thread.

Since a large part of my liberal arts education was "replying to dead people," it's a hard habit to break.

So's a concrete nun.