So, so far someone has resurrected topics such as this one from 2011, this one from 2017, and this one from 2012, and its absolutely ridiculous. This isn't entitlement or being rude, or even wining; this is common sense. In fact, most mainstream forums that I've seen either automatically lock the topic after a certain period of time so it can't be updated or ban those who bump topics for a reason that can't easily be justified. As an example of how frustrating and ridiculous this is, take a metaphorical news sight that lets people post and update news articles but doesn't let them delete them and doesn't auto-lock them. People can post comments on any news article but the posting brings the article to the top as though it were "new". Let's say that this site has been around since 2001. Someone (who I won't bother coming up with a name for) brings an article back to the top by commenting on it, and said article just so happens to be from 2002 (and this is 2019). That's a bit ridiculous, isn't it, since this metaphorical news sight just might have a forum? Just because the question you want to ask (or the thing you want to post about) is related to a topic that was posted in 2012, 2011, or even 2017 is no excuse to bring that topic all the way back to the top and make it look new or "recently updated". Its a lot better to post a new topic. I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to resurrect a topic that's older than a year or two just to ask a question or to 'give an update'. If I'm not mistaken, even Reddit locks topics after their 360 days old. Think about it: you open the forum one day to see what's new only to find a topic that seems 'new' because the forum shoves it *all the way* to the top (and humans can't keep track of all topics in the forum ever). You open it, check the date of the first post and realize its from 2009. How do you feel? I'll tell you how I feel -- pissed off. If a topic creation date is from 2009-2010, or is older than two years (at most) it should be against the forum rules to be resurrected, period. I don't want to go about making a warning system and all that; I'll leave that up to either the community or the admins, but seriously, this is ridiculous. An exception though should be made for both the introductions topic and the site restrictions thing, but nothing else.
The thing is, resurrecting a topic is not easy. It requires one of three things to happen:
1) the person resurrecting the topic deliberately hunts for it, going as far back as needed, until they find it, and post on it.
2) the person accidentally finds it in a google or forum search result (which usually requires explicit search keywords).
3) the user somehow has managed to get their browser to never delete history items and manages to dig it up in the multitude of ones they've generated since then (and was either the one who created the topic or was around when the topic was posted).
I really hope something is done about this and am quite surprised this hasn't been thought about until now.
I agree, it's vary anoying.
I see an interesting sounding topic, and then I look at it and.... wo! 2007!
Contact information:email: [email protected]
Skype: Brennan Draves
I'm usually found on online games, chatting, and being warned bye admins for talking to much, f**k you admin!
Just happened to me.
That having been said, what is a good or even reasonable length of time where resurrection should or should not be allowed? Obviously some people don't agree with a year because they're bringing up old topics and, while it could be argued that they're doing it just to be annoying, perhaps they honestly don't think they are being so on purpose. This is, of course, me playing devil's advocate for just a bit as I've always done my best to see both sides of the coin.
@3, fair enough. Like I said, I think Reddit locks topics after 360 days. In some groups I've seen it lock topics after 60 days. I think its configurable, I'm not very into reddit myself and have never ran a group (or whatever they call it up there). Obviously we'll need to find a happy medium, but this seriously needs to end sooner than later.
Hmm. I personally find no issue with topic resurrection. I personally find new topic posting more annoying. Just makes things more cluttered in my opinion and makes sorting through information more of a headache. Especially if a topic goes quiet and then it comes back after maybe a year or so. It becomes one of those find more information on this topic, or this one, then we might be running through chains of topics and...Grr it makes my head hurt just thinking about it. I'd rather personally just have to check one date and one topic rather than chains of topics hunting for the information I want.
#6 (edited by CAE_Jones 2019-01-29 09:01:34)
My first exposure to a no necroposting rule was two weeks, with exceedingly rare exceptions for very short, still recent topics for which there has been something new enough to be worth resurrecting it for.
That's probably too much. Things are slow around here. So a year probably makes more sense.
It would be harder, but two levels might be better: one that gives the poster a page with a warning, asking if they're sure their post is worth the resurrection but not a new thread, and the other just auto-locking the thread. I've never seen such a thing, though, so IDK how much of a pain it'd be.
Or, if we're feeling really enthusiastic about editing the site, have some mechanism by which posters gain whitemage mana, which is expended in proportion to how old the thread they're replying to is. Not enough mana = no necropost.
I'm a bit confused, why exactly is this so bad? It's never bothered me at all, if you see it's an old topic you just go to the last page and read the new posts. I honestly don't see the issue.
I don't know if we are going to make it a full on rule with warnings and such, but I do think this has to be considered due to recent events, to become a guideline at the very least. I'm wondering what's causing people to bring up old topics. Perhaps some users use the forum in a different way. When I log in, I usually just go straight to the "new" link at the top of the page to see what posts are new, and then I'd search if I'm struggling to find what I'm looking for. If it's something I'd like to ask, though, I usually create a new topic. Some people, however, might go straight to search, find a topic about a game they like, and then just post in it.
My personal thoughts are, to each their own, but I also think it should be a guideline, as it's strange to sometimes see a post from 2011 and then, suddenly, it's back with a question that could have easily been put in a new topic, but I don't think there should be a punishment for it.
Then again, topic revival is perfectly fine in some cases. If there is a topic which a dev posted for it's game, there is no reason not to post on it even if it was 5 years ago,, unless of course you look at the last posts which you should always do in such an old topic and notice the game is discontinued.
True. Its not that its a super ultra bad end-of-the-world kind of thing. Its incredibly annoying though to see the forum make an old topic look new because someone necrobumped it.
I wonder if there's like an extension we could get that autolocks topics after a certain amount of time? A lot of places do that.
Perhaps autolocks topics, accept for the original topic poster, who can post if they find news on that topic or something, which will then reopen it.
I am definitely in favor of this, I like 60 days but I could see going longer, I think going shorter might be a bad idea. I think the OP should always be able to revive it, especially if its in new releases. Topic necromancy\ is really annoying. Especially if you didn't check the date and now you're adding to the problem because you're posting info in something that'd like 5 years old. I think it needs to stop. No, it's not an end of the world thing, and no, I wouldn't think someone should be punished for doing it, the system should just be automatic, topic gets locked after the period that's decided upon.
It is pure, free of judgement, and raises me to the utter height of glory.
I personally feel that this is a relatively small-potatoes issue...but it is an issue nevertheless. I have personally locked and moderated a topic that was revived for no good reason, and am apt to do the same thing. It should (and will, if I have anything to say about it) be an explicit guideline henceforth. We don't want to be banning people for this unless they become extremely well-known for it, but it's annoying sometimes. I feel that doing it now and again is really and truly not the end of the world, and that any system that auto-locks topics is maybe going a little too far. Sometimes there are legitimate reasons to wake up a topic, though they're admittedly rather rare. I'd rather deal with this on a case-by-case basis. We simply don't have a big enough user base that this is too unwieldy a task.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1
Hmm. I see it as slightly annoying, but I think that sometimes reviving topics is a good thing and should be allowed. For example, in the new releases room it would be better just to bring back up your old topic if you are the dev of a game. I’ll give an example. Lets say I made a game called scroll war, and then an update to scroll war came out. I should probably just post about it in the topic I originally posted about scroll war. But, lets just say, someone has a question about scroll war. For example, where do I find the forest of evil thingies? It would probably be a better decision to post about it in the general game discussion. The dev might have discontinued the game and it would be much more likely to get an nswer if a new topic was posted in the general game discussion. But those are just my opinions. I have seen. Several times people reviving topics from 2005 or 2006, that’s when it starts to get annoying, because you’re not going to get your suggestion answered if you post on the troopanum topic, you’re much bette off just going to general game and posting there with a fresh new one. As the FAQ states, the forum does not have a limited amount of topics. Thanks for reading.
slightly old topic, but not as active on here as I once was. I definitely think there should be an automated system to just automatically hit down the hammer, and prevent replies. I believe that no punishment should be given, especially if someone has a genuine question, like requesting a link to a game from 2012. I fail to see why someone would do that to just be annoying. I think what we need to decide is the time frame, at which the topic should lock. I was thinking of around 3 years, I feel as if that's more than enough to revive anything you may want to revive, but I quite like Ethin's 360 day limit as well.
Yeah I think automatic topic lock after half a year unless op posts is pretty generous, as often development can stall for a while around here. Hard to say though because then you may just end up with a bunch of topics asking questions about the project status or how to do X thing in an old game in the general room, rather than just resurrecting a single topic. IMO people should just check the date and stop complaining about their own mistakes for the most part... though a request in the rules not to resurrect a topic without using the forum search to see if it's already been answered may help a tad. It's harder with giant topics though like Swamp or BKIII, so maybe their should be an exception for topics over 100 posts or something?
Well Ted, it sure looks like there's been uh, quite a bit of violence around here
"aaoh, that violence was terrible'!"
Yeah it was, pretty bad.
I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree with this. If you see a topic that's old, and nothing of substance has been added to it, then move along, nothing to see here, post on a topic that does interest you. I realize that not everyone has that amount of self-control, but the true duds, no matter how recent or necroptic they are, end up sinking with or without any enabling of others. Complaining that a topic is old and therefore useless, however, often has the exact opposite effect, so, since checking the original date barely takes a second, why don't you all try doing that, and then let it die a natural death. That, of course, is not even getting into the fact that a topic can be old but still relevant. What would you rather see? 400 topics about, to take a popular example on this particular forum, where to obtain free sound libraries, or one centralized location which gets added to over time? Obviously, I'm exaggerating a bit here, but personally, if we're talking about the fading art of netiquette, there is nothing more annoying to me than seeing someone ask a question that was literally answered days ago. Granted, this is much more of an issue on email lists, where you might see the following:
On Monday, John asks, "How do I change the speech rate of NVDA on the fly?" he gets an answer, thanks the person who answered him, and then, on Thursday, Judy comes along and asks the same question in a separate thread. John and Judy are both most likely long-time members, too, and are capable of performing a search either of the list archives or on Google. Again, I'm being slightly facetious here, but my point still stands, and it's more common than you'd think. I fear that enforcing such a rule would produce the same sort of effect here, and would make scrolling through the most recent posts a lot more laborious than it needs to be, because people would be over cautious about when, and what, they should post.
Are people really complaining about posting in old topics still? Just let it go and let people post where they want. I don't want 100 topics about the same thing that would suck! People were complaining about bringing back the Perilous Hearts topic and instead of having a nice conversation about it there were lots of people wining about the topic being brought back. I'm also against topics that auto lock after a year that makes 0 sense.
@19, if it made zero sense, other forums like Reddit wouldn't enforce it, now would they? Clearly they have a reason.
Lots of things make zero sense but they're still done. For example straws they are polluting our Earth and yet every bar gives you 2 little ones in each glass when as humans we are more than capable of drinking without them. I could go on and on but I won't. To me and this is my opinion I think auto locking topics makes zero sense. I also see it as a form of censorship which in my opinion is lame.
o seriusly guys? Resurecting elegal? And next time you complain there are to many toppics about the same thing.
#23 (edited by hadi.gsf 2019-02-16 22:46:09)
I agree with turtlepower17. i've been using forums since 2005 and some of them autolock old topics and some don't because this is based on the purpose of the forum.
There is a topic from 2004 about dog training in SA forums and users still use it because it makes perfect sense and creating 2500 topics about training a dog in a forum that isn't all about dogs or pets is horrendous.
There is a topic about asus rog gl503 gaming laptops on notebook review forums that was created on jun 2017. that topic is still going and it is ridiculous to lock that topic because it is still being used and people who own the asus 503 variants still search that topic when there's a common issue.
on Electronic arts forums i think the topics will be autolocked because games will get patches during their lifetime cycle and using a topic that's old makes no sense since the game mentioned might have been altered from back then. Also those sort of forums have autolock feature because the community managers would have easier time sorting through issues and idea and can dismiss the topics that are old and closed.
so yes, it depends on the forum and community, and during the 15 plus years that i've been using forums i've never seen users being salty over what these people call it topic Resurrection, whatever that means.
skype ID: hadi.gsf7