TheThumbPuppy
Registered User
Now, I hate to be that guy, but I will anyway. An open discussion is long overdue on this subject.
I have noticed that some members who resurrected an old thread got a snooty message that goes on and on with the likes of:
In fact, some don't even get the full palaver, but only a link to go and read all that gab on some other thread.
I have also noticed that some other member who also resurrected an old thread didn't get any message like that. Instead, loads of members jumped in the conversation again like it's the best thing since sliced bread.
Personally, I don't think that one of the most annoying things on forums is to have to go back and re-read pages of posts to try to figure out the context of the new post being added, sometimes years later.
And I don't think that forum etiquette is to create a new post – forum etiquette according to whom?
It doesn't matter if members who posted previously are not active any more and can no longer defend their position – it's not a trial, a forum is an asynchronous debate.
I enjoy when new members read some old thread and contribute with their own observations. It makes the forum feel alive. If I feel like it, I go back and re-read the previous posts. If I don't, I don't get me knickers in a twist and get on with me life.
It is well possible that established members dislike resurrecting old threads because they've seen them over and over again, but to new members they are relevant. If new members want to add their post to an old thread, so be it. I don't need the forum police to tell them it is forbidden.
Beyond that, it seems to me that this forum needs more discussion, not less, and discouraging members from posting because they didn't follow someone's arbitrary forum etiquette is not a good way to achieve that. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the members who received one of those messages hadn't been active on the forum since.
What struck me as odd is that the hoity-toity messages were sent only to some of those who resurrected an old thread. Were these members targeted to get rid of them by making them feel unwelcomed? Or were they just the lucky chosen ones to win a bit of extra shaming?
If you don't want new posts on old threads, just automatically archive them after a certain length of inactivity. Members will be able to read them, but they won't be allowed to post there (like on reddit and others). If threads are not archived, I'm afraid they're fair game.
Either way, those condescending messages did not sound very brotherly and I for one would welcome a more accepting and fair approach.
I have noticed that some members who resurrected an old thread got a snooty message that goes on and on with the likes of:
It is one of the most annoying things on forums to have to go back and re-read pages of posts to try to figure out the context of the new post being added, sometimes years later.
In fact, some don't even get the full palaver, but only a link to go and read all that gab on some other thread.
I have also noticed that some other member who also resurrected an old thread didn't get any message like that. Instead, loads of members jumped in the conversation again like it's the best thing since sliced bread.
Personally, I don't think that one of the most annoying things on forums is to have to go back and re-read pages of posts to try to figure out the context of the new post being added, sometimes years later.
And I don't think that forum etiquette is to create a new post – forum etiquette according to whom?
It doesn't matter if members who posted previously are not active any more and can no longer defend their position – it's not a trial, a forum is an asynchronous debate.
I enjoy when new members read some old thread and contribute with their own observations. It makes the forum feel alive. If I feel like it, I go back and re-read the previous posts. If I don't, I don't get me knickers in a twist and get on with me life.
It is well possible that established members dislike resurrecting old threads because they've seen them over and over again, but to new members they are relevant. If new members want to add their post to an old thread, so be it. I don't need the forum police to tell them it is forbidden.
Beyond that, it seems to me that this forum needs more discussion, not less, and discouraging members from posting because they didn't follow someone's arbitrary forum etiquette is not a good way to achieve that. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the members who received one of those messages hadn't been active on the forum since.
What struck me as odd is that the hoity-toity messages were sent only to some of those who resurrected an old thread. Were these members targeted to get rid of them by making them feel unwelcomed? Or were they just the lucky chosen ones to win a bit of extra shaming?
If you don't want new posts on old threads, just automatically archive them after a certain length of inactivity. Members will be able to read them, but they won't be allowed to post there (like on reddit and others). If threads are not archived, I'm afraid they're fair game.
Either way, those condescending messages did not sound very brotherly and I for one would welcome a more accepting and fair approach.