New Rules

[Tiberius]

Hi everyone,

Earlier this month we announced a member review of our rule rewrite. Thanks for all your comments; we have implemented a few changes and now the updated rules are in effect. Please familiarize yourself with the new rules: https://atheistforums.org/rules.php

- Atheist Forums Staff

[Foxaèr]

*Ignores them*

[robvalue]

Sounds good to me Great work!

It seems that necroposting is promoted to being actually bad, rather than just discouraged. Is that fair to say? I sometimes want to resurrect threads I started, to continue the theme and to tie it to what I've said previously. Is this alright or should I just not necropost even my own threads?

Many thanks!

EDIT: You know those "related thread" suggestions that come up at the bottom of the screen? I've noticed that many of them are often way over the necro threshold, so having them there seems counterproductive to telling people not to do it. Is there some way that this feature could filter out posts over 30 days old? Now that would be really neat! It would be a useful feature, without causing accidental necrosis.

[Longhorn]

There's a typo in the Report System Abuse rule (bolded)

Posts which violate the rules should be reported to staff in an appropriate manner. Creating a thread to complain about a member or a post is not allowed.

Members should not abuse the report system. Staff with often notify the member who made the report of the outcome, and if staff reject the member's report, the member should take care not to report similar content again. If staff receive multiple invalid reports from a member in a short period of time and despite being told repeatedly that their reports are invalid, staff will punish the member for abusing the report system.

Sorry, nitpicking

[robvalue]

Just a bump as I didn't get any answers yet to my questions my earlier post

Only when you guys have the time.

[surreptitious57]

The necroposting rule is some what unnecessary and this is the only rational forum I know of that has it and
it is unnecessary for two reasons. Firstly just because a particular thread has not been in active use for over
thirty days does not mean the subject matter itself is no longer relevant. Secondly new members or regular
members who have been off line over thirty days might want to contribute to it but could be deterred from
doing so if they see a pink bar of text advising them not to post. It would however not be impacting up on
anyone to respond to threads of over thirty days. Most threads which are responded to are actually active  
anyway which makes such a rule even more superfluous. And so if it was abolished would it really matter

A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN

[Napoléon]

I think in the case of necroposting, it depends entirely on the context and whether the necropost is actually necessary, or whether it is better to make a new thread. Seeing a thread from 5 years ago get raised from the dead, on a topic like "why do you believe in god" is flat out fucking annoying.

[robvalue]

Sure, I agree with that. My question was about my own posts from say a couple of months ago which I find more to add to.

[Napoléon]

Sure, I agree with that. My question was about my own posts from say a couple of months ago which I find more to add to.

In which case, I think it's perfectly rational to bump a thread like that. 

I know there's no such thing as common sense but I think it's one of those times when people just need to use it. At the very least if you're gonna necropost be aware of it, some people do it and carry on the conversation like the people who made the thread 20 years ago are still here to discuss it. 

Not aiming this at you per se, just sayin'.

[robvalue]

Sure, I totally agree Common sense is a little tricky to quantify in rules