Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On many (but not all) old c-d threads indexed by Google, people doing a search get this message at the bottom (bolding not mine but present in the message.)
Quote:
Please update this thread with any new information and opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.
Here's an example I just found via a google search. Scroll to the bottom to see the message.
Many, many old threads are revived with people unwittingly responding to a discrete concern or question that is years old, with new respondents not realising that the pet is undoubtedly dead by now, the car was probably fixed five years ago, the wedding was six years ago, hopefully the stains are gone after all these years, that guy is no longer our president , etc.
And I have seen moderators close threads that have been revived innappropriately for the express reason that "this is a done issue so I am closing the thread." Which for the record, in many instances, is the absolutely correct thing to do. But hardly fair to the new user who signed up just to respond!
Most savvy internet forum users won't respond to zombie threads once they realise it's way out of date. So reviving the thing is almost always pointless, and people who tag their question on point of view onto an old thread mostly get ignored, or encouraged to start a new thread of their own.
Why does City-Data continue to tag this message at the bottom of defunct threads? It just increases the noise.
Why does City-Data continue to tag this message at the bottom of defunct threads?
I thought it was done to alert the potential commenter that the thread is, indeed, old.
I have the idea that it is automatically tagged onto the end after XX amount of time has gone by since the last comment.
Just giving an supposition here; no doubt an official, knowledgeable person will be along soon....
Sometimes I think of a topic I want to bring up. I do a search to find out if it's already been talked about, and if it is already here but I have new input for the same subject, I'll reply in the old thread. To me that's more appropriate than starting a new thread with almost the same subject ... but if there's a problem with that I'll start a new thread instead. It doesn't matter to me.
I thought it was done to alert the potential commenter that the thread is, indeed, old.
I have the idea that it is automatically tagged onto the end after XX amount of time has gone by since the last comment.
Just giving an supposition here; no doubt an official, knowledgeable person will be along soon....
Thanks Macrina!
I would have thought so too except it appears to actively encourage newbies to bump old threads.
In one week I noticed three old threads shut down by mods for being old threads revived, and of course the vast majority of zombie threads are ignored and go *thunk* and that made me wonder why on earth the site software is set up to encourage revival of these things?
That is definitely not the norm; many similar-type sites have a feature that automatically locks threads after x amount of time. I think that is a great idea. Old threads will still be indexed by search engines as long as they stay relevant. Multiple bumped old threads on a discussion site look pretty bad and like the forum is neglected, IMO.
There is nothing "wrong" with posting on a dormant thread.
But then why do some mods lock threads that were revived?
I'm not arguing with policy here, just saying there is discrepancy.
And yes, I actually think there is something wrong with posting to some dormant threads. It depends on the topic of course but there are old threads and questions that really do not need to be revived.
But then why do some mods lock threads that were revived?
I'm not arguing with policy here, just saying there is discrepancy.
Moderators shouldn't automatically lock a thread just because it was old and revived. It should depend on the topic. If the issue is, indeed, a long gone pet or a car that broke five years ago, a new comment is probably not very helpful. Most of the threads, however, contain opinions that may still be valid today. Or they may have change over time and new details can now be added. It is this kind of threads that makes us promote what some people call "necroposting."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, etc.
