Resurrecting threads ethical?

[ranmaonehalf]

Is it? It seems dishonest when there is no real reason to except to trick people.

I think if you have a valid comment then its fine but just to resurrect it is unethical if you ask me.

Comments?

 

[Psudopod]

There's nothing ethical about necromancy.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Is it? It seems dishonest when there is no real reason to except to trick people.

I think if you have a valid comment then its fine but just to resurrect it is unethical if you ask me.

Comments?

Why? I haven't been here all that long and sometimes I look at the old threads and I've never seen them. If they're interesting to me, why would it be unethical to resurrect them?

 

[Uncle Tommy]

How would resurrecting a thread be unethical or dishonest?

 

[wanderingone]

Is it? It seems dishonest when there is no real reason to except to trick people.

I think if you have a valid comment then its fine but just to resurrect it is unethical if you ask me.

Comments?

When it's a newbie who is seeing something for the first time I wouldn't even think twice about it. Why would it serve to "trick" someone?

I'd rather see an old thread pop up than a new thread with a 2 year old news story link... but I don't think either is particular unethical.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

When it's a newbie who is seeing something for the first time I wouldn't even think twice about it. Why would it serve to "trick" someone?

I'd rather see an old thread pop up than a new thread with a 2 year old news story link... but I don't think either is particular unethical.

And I'd rather see an old thread pop up than a dozen new threads about the same subject.

Go and look at all of the homosexuality threads. They're just the same two or three questions asked over and over and over in dozens of threads.

 

[DaisyDay]

How would resurrecting a thread be unethical or dishonest?

Dunno, the OP didn't explain.

 

[wanderingone]

And I'd rather see an old thread pop up than a dozen new threads about the same subject.

Go and look at all of the homosexuality threads. They're just the same two or three questions asked over and over and over in dozens of threads.

Some people have sex on the brain a lot particular male/male sex (female/female doesn't seem to get mentioned nearly as much)

Personally I don't like the old threads resurrected either, but I certainly don't see it as some kind of "trick"

 

[Axioma]

Bringing threads back from the dead is playing God! What has science done!?

 

[ranmaonehalf]

When its done for the purpose of increasing posts and or tricking picking that do not payattention to year old dead threads. Those people may expect certian memeber to be here but they may have gone on and will not reply. So it is deceptively trying to create the apperance of a living thread. Now others can take a resurrected thread and give it a little life but in general to the degree of resurrecting year old threads its simple deception.

 

[The Nihilist]

Bringing threads back from the dead is playing God! What has science done!?

/thread

 

[AV1611VET]

Old threads never die, they just wait to be resewn.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Call me cocky, but I've brought threads back to the front page with an arbitrary reply just so people can see it. I've had several instances where I've made a valid point, and rather than acknowledge it, people on the opposing side just pretend to ignore it and let it fall off the radar...so I like to bringing it back for two reasons...so other people can see my idea, and as a reminder to those who thought they could ignore my input.

So, ethical? Probably not

...but for me personally (and I know I'm wrong for thinking this way) sometimes it feels better to right than ethical...sorry

 

[AV1611VET]

Here's the 411 on this topic:

Thread bumping is commonly considered a breach of netiquette and some moderated forums forbid it. Users may get around that by posting what is ostensibly a genuine reply. Sometimes this will mockingly contain the word "bump" in it, such as "Wandering the forum, he bumps into this thread...", or be a trivial question or response such as "Anyone?" Bumping old or inactive ("dead") threads is occasionally called "necroposting" or "thread necromancy", and the bumped posts referred to as "frankenposts". "Dead" threads that are reawakened are often called "thread necros". People who resurrect old threads are often called "threadomancers". On some boards, bumping a new thread with no replies in order to elicit a response is tolerated, but resurrecting an old thread that has run its course and has been inactive for a period of time (usually anywhere from a few days to a month) is prohibited. The acceptable practice is usually to start a new thread and link to the old thread so that readers can become familiar with the background information. "My Ninja Kiwi" is an example of a site that strictly does not allow thread bumping - you can get banned after a single offense.

I disagree with it.

 

[white dove]

When its done for the purpose of increasing posts and or tricking picking that do not payattention to year old dead threads. Those people may expect certian memeber to be here but they may have gone on and will not reply. So it is deceptively trying to create the apperance of a living thread. Now others can take a resurrected thread and give it a little life but in general to the degree of resurrecting year old threads its simple deception.

I don't think so - especially in this particular section of the boards. Many of these topics go in seasons and come right back up again eventually, so why not continue from an earlier time? I don't think it always has to do with upping the thread count, either. Sometimes, there aren't any interesting threads, so old ones that are a bit more interesting will be dug up as a result. I guess I just don't see it as deceptive, so long as the poster can read what date the OP took place. *shrug*

 

[Chesterton]

When I first signed on here I perused threads that were years old just because they were interesting. During slow times, I still occassionally scan through titles in the vault. I've never bumped anything, but it seems like you should be able to without it being a breach of etiquette.

We talk about current events some, but mostly I think we talk about ideas, and ideas don't just become irrelevant after a month goes by.

And what does it hurt? If you don't like it, don't read it. Maybe the topic is something someone else hasn't seen and they might enjoy it.

 

[b&wpac4]

When I first signed on here I perused threads that were years old just because they were interesting. During slow times, I still occassionally scan through titles in the vault. I've never bumped anything, but it seems like you should be able to without it being a breach of etiquette.

We talk about current events some, but mostly I think we talk about ideas, and ideas don't just become irrelevant after a month goes by.

And what does it hurt? If you don't like it, don't read it. Maybe the topic is something someone else hasn't seen and they might enjoy it.

I find it interesting to see how I have changed in the months since starting to post here. Some ideas I have posted in the past I no longer hold. I don't mind bumped threads from the past, as long as they are not being bumped just to call someone an idiot or whatever.

 

[Chesterton]

I don't mind bumped threads from the past, as long as they are not being bumped just to call someone an idiot or whatever.

Agreed. People should start a fresh thread to call someone an idiot.