Bump Versus Lock

[tickletorments1]

Should old threads/posts be locked to stop bumping.

I don't bump but like to see current replies, to good previous posts.

There isn't much new stuff of good quality like some of the old Isabeau stuff.

I do reply to bumped threads/posts i must admit.

Its a catch 22 (damned both ways)

What is the official point of view.

Ii would hate to see the old stuff dissapear.

I would only lock the aruementative or flaming threads/ posts.

But some folk love those.

A lot of the originators don't seem to be about which seems a great loss.

Its took a month for me to post a few pics and answer a few threads and post some new ones.

Some of these people have posted thousands of comments and threads.

Whats your view.

 

[Inverse]

The problem with posting on old threads, is for the most part~ replying to an OP who is no longer watching or maintaining a thread is chaotic. Without this courtesy in place, you could be posting 7-8 year old threads with 80% of the members probably not even online anymore.

Sure, you can start a new discussion from that point~ and it's fine for those actually replying at the tail... but for most people when they log in and click on the threads, yeah~ it'll be new to them... and the majority of that thread won't even be with people they can discuss anything with.

Nothing is going to tell them that they have to click to the end, just to jump into a discussion that isn't really linked to any past conversations. You might as well start a new thread.

 

[MistressValerie1]

I usually only lock outdated news or personal threads that have been bumped, although it's best not to post to threads that are more than about six months old unless one has something significant to add.

 

[Violetta]

Unfortunately it seems that most people who bump these old threads usually only add "me too" style posts without adding anything to whatever conversation they chose to revive.

 

[PurpleStyle]

Can we make a song out of this? Bump, lock and drop it!

 

[tickletorments1]

Can we make a song out of this? Bump, lock and drop it!

Stop it stop it bump, drop lock

bumpty bumpty bump drop lock

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

I tend to come and go from the Theater, but my feeling is: If I want to, say, talk about a movie I've recently seen, and am able to find a thread devoted to "Movies Recently Seen" in the back-pages, I will just dig it back up rather than begin a new thread along those lines.

I think too that, as new people come in, they will check out the back-pages for topics of interest to them, and if they have something fresh to add, they should be allowed to do so.

The only time I see thread necromancy as an issue is when someone dredges up a topic that was obviously time-specific. As a for-instance: An artist or writer announcing that they're taking requests back in 2008 or something. With alittle checking, the necromancer can determine the last time the artist last visited, whether they're even still coming to the Theater, and so on. Keep in mind, though, that some folks are new to the Net, even now, and may not be as capable(yet) of even simple checks like that.

For the most part, when I first landed online a decade or so ago, and had little or no idea wtf I was doing, the folks at the TMF(where I first joined) were mostly helpful. We should encourage new posters, and not be trollish dicks. If you just gotta get your rude on, try 4chan or even Craigslists discussion boards or something. There's enough rudeness in the world, and it seems to be getting worse every day. I sometimes wonder if it isn't due to the anonymity of the Net, spilling over into daily life.

 

[makemlaugh2003]

While I, as is often the case with me, agree with Rick Tibbler on this issue...

...is it really that important? I mean, seriously? I fail to understand why this would even be remotely close to a big deal. And, while I'd personally embrace a world in which its worst problem at hand was how old a thread had to be before it was deemed "unbumpable," I just don't get what the huge issue about the whole thing is. C'mon, people.

 

[general zod1]

Some of the people who bump old threads usually have just joined up. Take for example a tickle art thread going back years ago. The originator of that thread may have used an old pic hosting site like angel fire(is that correct?). Now a lot of us know sites like that are no longer around.

That new user probably does not know that. They will ask where are the pics? Then some idiot will ask why they are bumping an old thread.
All a long time member has to type in for a respsonse is tell them that the pics no longer are around because the hosting site no longer exists.

There is no reason to be rude about it.

 

[Violetta]

At the same time there's no reason to dredge up old topics and discussions that've run their course if you're not going to add something useful. Bringing back an art request thread to tack on another cliché, unoriginal request or ask if the artist is still doing them at all could've been done via PM without necro'ing a thread. Bringing up some discussion just to add something as insipid as "Hmm interesting," or "I agree with some of these posts" just reeks of post count padding. If something of merit was added that brought the discussion back, great! but all it serves to do is push currently active topics down a few notches.