(February 14, 2016 at 9:59 pm)Jenny A Wrote:(February 14, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: This whole concern for the poster thing? I don't buy it. And even if I did, it's beyond ridiculous.
I thought this wasn't a rule. Why do I get the impression you think it is?
Pugnacious ain't ya? Look, first of all, the fact you are getting a response is serendipitous because you removed my name from the quote line. Second, you asked why, and I told you why I think it should be a rule.
The rule itself suggests other reasons:
Quote:Necroposting is not allowed. We consider necroposting to be the act of posting a new reply to a thread which hasn't had any new replies for 30 days or more. A warning notice will appear if you are about to necropost, however you will not be prevented from necroposting due to limitations with the forum software, and also to allow certain exceptions to the rule as outlined below.
Exceptions to this rule are granted by staff on a case by case basis. Usually if the thread is popular and intended to be an ongoing discussion, rather than one related to a specific event, necroposting is allowed. For example, in a thread where members are encouraged to post photos of themselves, necroposting would be allowed, but in a thread which is a discussion about a recent event or news article, necroposting would not be allowed.
Notice that while it contains exceptions, it is a rule. I don't remember anyone being disciplined for violating the rule since I've been a mod (not all that long), but I can imagine circumstances in which we might.
What I don't understand is why starting a fresh thread bothers you so much.
I think it shouldn't be a rule. It's extremely useless and it's irrational.
