"Bumping" Old threads...

artman @_@artman @_@
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Brad,



I guess no one's replying to this because they think they'll get banned...don't blame them...



Honestly, you think that this won't happen again? This is a forum discussing topics ranging from political to technical. If you don't want people to "bump up" (guess that's your take on this issue) then remove them. That's your job. But it is probably more difficult than you think because, as life...things tend to repeat themselves...



Ok. I guess it was the PT Cruiser thread...but what's next? The Israel/ Palestinian threads? The "I think Bush is a Moron" threads?



Please...



We'll try. But understand that this will happen.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    ibrowseibrowse Posts: 1,749member
    Sometimes it's better to start a thread with a similar topic than drag up an old one that's only half relevant anymore. But I do remember when I first came here I saw a lot of "Do a search" responses (this was before the pre-VB search function broke) all over the place. Should we set a specific amount of time after which a thread should be recreated rather than brought back to life?
  • Reply 2 of 11
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    my feelings on this are mixed. i know i have asked, say, tech questions in the genius bar, and most people are probably looking at "view new posts" when they come onto AI. it's just natural to go towards that search, unless you have somethign specific in mind. heck, that's why future hardwrae used to be so overcrowded in the old days -- it wasn't that people didn't know better. it was the first in the list, and that's where people turned to first.



    well, if i have an important issue that needs to be resolved, i'm kind of annoyed when i end up getting bumped down several dozen spots in "new posts" because a few people have bugs up their butts in appleoutsider or something.



    simply put, "bumping" can either be used or abused. but to make a blanket statement that bumping is not allowed seems heavy-handed to me.



    plus, so many peopl say "don't start a new thread -- do a search and put it with an old thread that applies..." well, which is it? new thread or old? well, just like everything else... "it depends." and that's when admins and mods need to assist in board management.



    that's my ten cents... the two cents are free.
  • Reply 3 of 11
    artman @_@artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member
    Yeah. It's honestly a "use" or "abuse" issue. Politically, culturally, or socially there may be a situation where reviving an old topic might be relevant. But with technical issues (OS, hardware or software)....they just change (upgrade) perpetually which is maybe where an older topic may not seem relevant.



    ...and as far as PT Cruisers go...really...who cares? That's where I'd see the topic as being totally redundant and irrelevant...stoopid actually.
  • Reply 4 of 11
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    the issue is when a thread is 3-6 months dormant, someone will reply to it as if it were posted yesterday. it creates confusion, as there are many responses that are now coming half a year later.



    this was also an instance where a user revived at least half a dozen old threads just to be a prick.



    i think it's pretty straight forward when bumping a thread is ok. if something has had no replies for 3 months, make a new thread and just link to the old on if you have to refer to it.
  • Reply 5 of 11
    argentoargento Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Artman @_@





    Ok. I guess it was the PT Cruiser thread...



    Hell yes I started that thread, I rule.
  • Reply 6 of 11
    ibrowseibrowse Posts: 1,749member
    Who's gonna be the one to bump this thread next March...? 8)
  • Reply 7 of 11
    curiousuburbcuriousuburb Posts: 3,325member
    there are some threads with detailed concepts or great explanations

    (some of the "alternative space technologies" and "hard science" stuff i recall)

    that are evergreen (to use media content terminology, they look as good all year)

    continuing discussions on fresh technological leaps don't suffer much from posting gaps

    i'd rather dig up a well reasoned thread deep in examples than begin a fresh but thin one that references it



    another example, (not so deep, but fits the timing mold):

    my "Marvin returns to Mars" thread will have little activity during interplanetary transit

    it'll see a five month period of no posting (last post 07/13 until 11/20) in cruise phase

    then three of the probes en route will land in Jan in quick succession, and updates will rock

    (perhaps worthy of a "new pictures from mars" thread for each lander)

    but wouldn't it be preferable if i append Marvin by bumping?





    and if WMD/Saddam/Osama are ever found, wouldn't people want to tie loose ends?



    closure -vs.- new thread, hmmm.
  • Reply 8 of 11
    jimdreamworxjimdreamworx Posts: 1,095member
    This was a great idea. A long time coming.



    Do a search for the word "bump" and notice how many threads were bumped to the top for the sake of keeping them there, as opposed to contributing to the thread.



    It's time that practice stopped.
  • Reply 9 of 11
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Of course, we have seen a ton of threads here locked because, as the moderator pointed out, there were already active threads on the subject, though they would be on page 2 or 3.
  • Reply 10 of 11
    thuh freakthuh freak Posts: 2,664member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JimDreamworx

    This was a great idea. A long time coming.



    Do a search for the word "bump" and notice how many threads were bumped to the top for the sake of keeping them there, as opposed to contributing to the thread.



    It's time that practice stopped.



    for the sake of everythign thats good and crusty:

    ibl
  • Reply 11 of 11
    ibrowseibrowse Posts: 1,749member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by thuh Freak

    for the sake of everythign thats good and crusty:

    ibl



Sign In or Register to comment.