Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Site Usage > User Guidelines & Forum Features

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-19-2013, 12:08 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,103
Default Resurrecting old threads

I am wondering if anyone here feels we shouldn't be able to resurrect an old discussion or not. Or do you consider it "necroposting" and undesirable?

I was prompted to write this after Dirtclustit was scolded for posting new messages to some pretty old threads. People do this sometimes - they search for a topic, find a thread they like, and post to it without looking at the date. I've done it, too. Sure, it can be strange or perhaps even annoying if someone addresses a new post to a person who hasn't logged in here in 3 years. But sometimes people purposely look for older threads simply because they're interesting! However, the purpose of this thread is not to talk about Dirtclustit, but the response from Ariakas in that particular thread.

Even though the discussion was continuing, Ari told Dirtclustit to "stop restoring ancient threads." I then stated to Ari that there is no rule in the Forum Guidelines prohibiting posting to old threads. In his reply, Ari told me he "wasn't necessarily speaking as a mod," when he scolded Dirtclustit. So, since Ari says he wasn't wearing his Moderator Hat when he posted to that thread, I feel I should be able to discuss the statements he made. I was going to reply over there, but rather than create a tangent on the other thread, which is here: The superiority complex against monogamous people... , I decided to start a new thread about it.

First, here is my response to Ari's last post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
No one in this thread posts anymore, or very few do.
Exactly half of the people who posted to this thread before Dirclustit did are still active members who either logged in or posted very recently. Why would that matter, anyway?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
Just start a new thread, with new people and reference this as a topic. Its relatively easy.
It's just as easy, if not easier, to add to an old thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
(. . . I just know looking at his other threads, the two other mods both asked him to stop including other users), and is actively enforced on every forum I have ever been on or run.
What two other mods? In those other cases, I believe that he was addressing his posts directly to people who hadn't been back in a long time, in topics that seemed more personal and less general. Nevertheless, if there is something specific about his posts that someone objects to, that is one thing, but for you to make a blanket statement against reviving old threads -- when doing so has long been not only accepted but encouraged here, and there is nothing in the Guidelines against it -- is unfair. We've usually just pointed out to people, "Hey, I don't think that person will see your post since they haven't been here in two years," or teased them about it, and let it go at that. But now all of a sudden, he's told he shouldn't post to "ancient threads" because we supposedly don't do that here? We've been able and encouraged to do it for a long time, why would it have changed now? Doesn't make any sense!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
. . . actually its always been discouraged, at every turn. Yes search, yes learn, no don't bring back the dead. Unless for two years they weren't saying that, this was actively enforced when I started here (in fact I watched many people get beaten with a big stick, so I was polite.
Not true. I joined at the end of 2010 and have been very active here ever since. I've never seen anyone get scolded by a moderator here for posting to an old thread in all that time. In fact, one of my earliest posts was a resurrection of an old thread. Like you, I've been a moderator elsewhere and a member of numerous forums for many years (though I don't know why you brought that up - plenty of people here have lots of forum experience). Every online community is different. Most forums I've belonged to ask people to do a search first before posting a new thread.

The fact that there are no rules here against reviving old topics makes this forum more fun and user-friendly than some others, IMO. In fact, to quote one of our members:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe
I love that this forum doesn't object to resurrecting old threads . . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe
I have no problem with people responding to a thread where the OP is unlikely to respond. The post and the answers may be relevant to someone else's situation who is browsing/lurking.

But, let me see, "beaten with a big stick," hmmm. I did a little search... and these are just a few examples:
In Jan. 2011, Senga posted to a thread that had been "dead" for about a year. I teased her about "dredging up old threads" and two members who were moderators at the time wrote to encourage that practice:
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper
that rocks. I love that shit... just cause they are old doesn't mean they aren't awesome! Thanks for the memory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos
i think it's super-grooovy when people read what has already been written on here instead of expecting everyone else to summarize and regurgitate things for them.
Another member added:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemondrop
LOL Wow! I remember this thread! I'm still wishing them success.
And then eight months later, the OP came back with an update:
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightsun
Well, it's been a long time since we were here and since I posted anything on the poly board. It's good to know that people have kept us in their thoughts and care enough to check on us.
No one was beaten with big sticks! Posting to an old thread was encouraged! Doing so even brought an old member back to post an update - and that is not the only instance when something like that happened.

= = = =

In Feb, 2011, Rarechild (whom I believe was still a Mod at the time) revived a thread Mono started, which hadn't had any posts since Dec. 2009. Several members, including other Moderators, continued the conversation, and indeed GS wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundedSpirit
Old thread resurfaced - good !
No one reprimanded RC for reviving a nearly 2-year old thread. Everybody was glad that she did.

= = = =

In Mar. 2011, LovingRadiance posted to an old thread of Maca's in General Discussions that also hadn't had any posts since Oct. 2009:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance
So much time has passed . . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance
Yes, this one is an old thread, that I brought back up . . .
The conversation continued for another month, and no one berated LR for reviving an "ancient" thread.

= = = =

In June 2011, questioningperson resurrected a thread that hadn't had any posts since May 2010. You obviously had no objection to rejoining the discussion back then, Ari:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas
Wow this is an old thread. Almost a year since I posted in it . . .
You added your comments and then the conversation continued and several people expressed how much they appreciated that the thread had been revived:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erosa
Wow, I love reading through this! It gives me lots of a ideas and it's very inspiring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sage
Interesting thread!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrowbound
Wow. Great thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyGrlJenny
This was a very fun thread to read!
The thread was still going as recently as Feb. 2013. QP was not scolded by anyone for resurrecting it.

= = = =

Again in June 2011, Rory posted to a thread that had no posts since 2009:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
This is quite an old thread but I'll bump since we were talking about this with my girlfriend just yesterday.
Several people participated in the conversation after that, including you, Ari. No mods intervened to say that old threads should not be "bumped."

= = = =

In Nov. 2011, Rory revived another 2009 thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
This is an old thread, and people have moved on from these situations. But I found these thoughts extremely helpful.
Redpepper, then a moderator, even added:
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper
Oh man this is an old thread! Nice! nice to have the chance to look back. Thanks rory.
Lightning did not strike Rory for resurrecting it.

= = = =

This past June 2013, JaneQSmythe found an old thread from late 2010 and posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe
Poking around in old threads today and came across this one - thought I'd revive it.
JQS was not admonished for doing so, and the conversation continued into August.

= = = =
This was just a small sample, which I only posted to show you how much "reviving ancient threads" has indeed been encouraged and the norm here. So, where were all the big sticks? Maybe you were thinking of a different forum you belonged to?

I hope that something ImaginaryIllusion once wrote still applies here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImaginaryIllusion
Our approach is generally hands off as much as possible . . . for a few key reasons.

We want people to be able to express themselves with minimal fear of censorship, even when what they have to say may be controversial. . . .

The community is mostly self regulating on it's own.
I think it's better to be able to continue as we have and not worry about how old a post is, though of course using common sense is important. Yay or nay, folks, on reviving old discussions?
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein

Last edited by nycindie; 09-19-2013 at 12:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-19-2013, 12:54 PM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

I think people should be able to do as they like. You'll remember that when I joined, I was against the ethos of telling old users to simply read old threads effectively shutting down any dialogue - it was as if people were saying that they don't wish to discuss the common debates such as veto rights again, or directly in relation to their issue/query. That seems to have stopped now so I don't have any issue with with whether people choose to resurrect old threads. The only thing I wish there was is an indication on the boards of when a thread was started, so you'd know right off if it was an old thread or not.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-19-2013, 04:20 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,103
Default

If you click on the New Threads link to see what threads have new posts, at least you get the ones with the latest updates. But no, the search results don't show the date of when the thread was started. The only options we have is either to click on the first page of a thread to see when it started or, if doing an Advanced Search for a specific keyword or tag, you can sort results by Thread Start Date to see which ones have the oldest beginnings. But threads that are "ancient" can still be quite relevant.

Also, there are long-running still-active threads here that were started ages ago, and which had some long breaks in postings, and are still popular, such as the Tattoos thread. That was started in July 2009 and was posted to as recently as Jan. 2013.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein

Last edited by nycindie; 09-19-2013 at 04:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-19-2013, 06:15 PM
Nadya Nadya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 152
Default

I often enjoy the resurrected old threads, especially in the General Discussions forum. If a topic is a general poly topic, most likely it will not be out of date even if discussed several years after it has been started.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-19-2013, 09:56 PM
dingedheart dingedheart is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,269
Default

Indie, ......very very impressive ...I like the research ...nice job

I agree..... general discussion topics or concepts what difference does it make. The superiority thread is a perfect example.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-20-2013, 12:08 AM
BrigidsDaughter's Avatar
BrigidsDaughter BrigidsDaughter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 822
Default

I think it depends on how they nercropost. It's fairly easy to click a person's name and see when their last post was - if you're addressing the OP and they haven't posted in a couple of years, it's probably pointless. I'm rather see the new thread referenced in a new post or similar threads merged and categorized I guess then to have someone show up and necropost half a dozen threads just cuz.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-21-2013, 12:25 AM
ImaginaryIllusion's Avatar
ImaginaryIllusion ImaginaryIllusion is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,927
Exclamation Mod Note

Since this has generated some discussion, let's be clear, this IS my mod hat.


Something to keep in mind about the guidelines is that they are not entirely exhaustive or built to cover every eventuality. Otherwise they'd be as long as the "How are you Doing" thread, ... and it's not like anyone seems to read them all as it is.

Necro posting as Ari has explained is generally discouraged on most forums, and with good reason.

As for the examples that NYC provided, yes, there has been a limited tolerance of necro's in the past. However, the examples provided were individually isolated incidents, and generally involved some kind of additional contribution or rekindling of discussion that would be independent of the previous posters contributions. (ie: It's very similar to splitting off a new thread, and later having it merged back to an older after the fact)

There is a difference between necro's occurring once in a while with new contributions, and a habitual digging up the dead to desecrate the corps.

Bottom line: Necro's once in a while isn't an issue, especially if you have some value to add, and can do so respectfully to absent members. Just don't make a habit of it.

Anything further about Ari's initial post and the previous mod warnings will not be discussed here, as per the guidelines.
__________________
“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.” - Chinese Proverb

-Imaginary Illusion

How did I get here & Where am I going?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-25-2013, 06:33 AM
aLABiMCpl's Avatar
aLABiMCpl aLABiMCpl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mandeville, LA
Posts: 80
Thumbs up 👍

`

It is new to someone, unless this place stopped accepting new people..?..
As long as it's an appropriate continuation and not just a Troll or a bump, it's inevitable.


________________________________

I have been on Forums that actually lock Threads after a given time, even if they were unresolved.

`
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-09-2014, 06:01 PM
Maleficent Maleficent is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Default

I don't mind old threads being brought back into discussion but I very seldom post on them. Even if the topic is one that interests me I know that it's likely the posters have left or gone inactive or forgotten all about a discussion they had on May 16, 2011. I avoid the older posts.

Along the same train of thought, is it standard practice for new posters to be discouraged from starting new threads? I find it extreamy dissmissive and off putting to ask a question or start a thread only to be brushed off and told to do a search on the topic.

Yeah. Things have been talked about and talked about. But I haven't talked about them yet. I'd like to engage in a discussion. Rather than be sent off to the search function to read a discussion someone else had on the topic months or years before poly was even a blip on my radar.

It has me hesitant to post much of anything. I find it unfriendly. I'm sure the intention is simply to offer posters more information but it feels like "we talked about this without you. Piss off Newbie". I've contemplated leaving the boards because of it.
__________________
Me - bi female hinge of a closed V / developing triad
Hank - my husband of 15 years.
Darla - long distance girlfriend of 1 year.
We have seven dependent children between us.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-09-2014, 08:39 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maleficent View Post
Along the same train of thought, is it standard practice for new posters to be discouraged from starting new threads? I find it extreamy dissmissive and off putting to ask a question or start a thread only to be brushed off and told to do a search on the topic.
No one is discouraged from posting a new topic. If you're referring to some of my posts which include links to existing threads, I simply encourage people to do a search and see what's here already. That doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't post new threads. Most forums to which I have belonged do ask members to search first before posting. However, it's not a requirement here (hell, we know most folks never even bother to read the Guidelines). <sigh>

This forum is a goldmine of information and it seems a waste if people don't at least make an effort to find previous discussions on a topic. It doesn't matter how old the threads are - there have been a lot of problems, situations, and interesting questions posted here, and much wisdom shared here over the years - why shouldn't we encourage new members to take advantage of that? That's why we tag discussions - so they can be found again at a later point by doing a Tag Search. Furthermore, it's always a good idea to get in the habit of adding Tags to threads, your own and other people's, for this very reason.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
communication, community, etiquette, forum features, internet, netiquette, self-expression

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:24 AM.