I don't object to the resurrection of old threads, as long as new posts to such threads are relevant to the subject matter at hand. This can actually be of benefit, since an old thread on a given subject might contain quite a bit of information or perspective.

However, bumping old threads can make for confusion and, sometimes, anger. Few members, if any, are so diligent in their reading of threads, that they look at the dates on other posts right off the bat, and once they realize they are replying to an old thread, they tend to speak up.

So, beginning today, the forum has a new policy. If you bump a thread in which the *last post* is more than four months old, the first thing your post should contain is "This is an older thread"

In addition to the courtesy of this caveat, its absence might indicate that the poster is a bot, and this helps me keep the forum clean.

I am asking members to bump old threads sparingly. Don't bump old threads on a whim. Do it with purpose.

If you see someone bump an old thread and they don't follow this new policy, please refrain from challenging them. Instead, use the report-this-post tool, which is located in the lower right corner of every post, just to the right of the Edit button, and I will tend to the matter.

Most of you who might bump an old thread will likely need to be reminded of this new policy the first time you encounter it. I'll probably need reminding, too.

I'd like to note that if you are the OP of a thread you are resurrecting, in addition to Para's direction in the thread, you can edit the title to include a statement that the thread was resurrected.

Something like:

Back from the Dead [date]

Resurrected [date]

Zambonifide [date]

Just a thought.

Do I need to update and resign my waiver?

This is a good policy. I like that keeping a developing topic in the same thread, adds perspective without being repetitive. Some topics take years to reach their end but 20 threads on it as it progresses would be tedious. This new policy would minimize confusion for sure. I was momentarily tripped up by the Superbowl thread until I figured it’s unlikely for a new thread to have so many pages so soon. Looked at the dates and was confirmed, bumped old thread.

I don't usually comment on how you run this place, Para ('cause I think you do a great job), but this is, for me, an outstanding requirement for those old threads.

I've gotten into some thread then eventually figgered out it was several years old (OK, I'm a little slow).

Thanks.

Bob

Thanks. I saw one very old thread be revived by a newish poster and wondered, but didn’t want to overstep and wasn’t sure the best approach. Thanks for the guidance!

noted sir

I clarified the policy. Originally, I had said that the policy applies to any thread which is more than four months old. That's not what I intended. There are lots of active threads which are more than four months old. Hell, the 'You will buy a Glock' thread began in 2009.

The policy is: If you bump a thread in which the *last post* is more than four months old, the first thing your post should contain is "This is an older thread"

Thank you Para.

I saw RHINO, who has not posted in a few years, in a thread a couple days ago and thought, "Oh great, he's back posting". Then I looked at the date.

Yeah I've caught myself reading several threads then checking the date and finding it years ago...

That's certainly a good idea, they always seem to be older threads, with a newer member posting, and the response is sort of mechanical...

Often, doing a SEARCH, results come up with your selected search parameters from the dark ages. Unwittingly posting in the thread....boom, necropost!

quote:

Originally posted by straightshooter1:

...I've gotten into some thread then eventually figgered out it was several years old (OK, I'm a little slow)...

That makes two of us (who am I kidding...that's a lot of us!).

Good idea, Para, and if I can suggest, if you notice a thread resurrected by someone other than the OP, could you put that notice in the Title? I'm assuming if the OP brings it back, he'll know to update the Title himself.

I commented on a recent occurrence of this too yesterday.

Then I realized, I've resurrected threads regarding movies or series in the past.

Very good to note that it's an old thread.

It would be a good idea for the OP to edit the title if they bump their old thread, or if they see someone else bump it, but I'll stop short of making it a requirement. As sure as I'm typing this, if I made it a requirement, we would have members being hounded from time to time to do so. Some members can be a bit fanatical about this stuff and I don't want anyone to be bothered over this.

Got it.

Before I post something and do not recall it having been a topic, I perform a search so as not to duplicate topics. On at least one occasion, I accidentally picked up a very old one (2 years old as I recall) that I did not realize the age.

After some members rather emphatically pointed that out, I have been much more diligent.

10-4 Para.
(But I’m still not buying a Glock).

^^^ Oh, but you will 400m...you will!

in case this was not seen the first time....

(I assume this is why an old thread was locked yesterday)