Bumping of old threads

It happens. Posts in the queue do not show the age of the thread they're responding to. The only option is to manually check each thread - something i don't have the time or patience for.

edit: I agree with Redmask. sometimes there's a thread which has good info, or perhaps there's an update to an existing issue so a bump may be warranted.

MrDisco wrote: ↑

Sep 14th, 2018 3:26 am

It happens. Posts in the queue do not show the age of the thread they're responding to. The only option is to manually check each thread - something i don't have the time or patience for.

C'mon, you have to earn your paycheque somehow! J/K

I understand how that would be a tedious process. Thanks for answering.

I'm often looking for other things in the queue (spam, adverts, etc) so the odd time something slips through. I will usually check threads where new users are posting but the odd time you get interrupted or you just don't have time. If you report a post in the thread and explain that there is a necro bump then we will usually lock it. There are also rare times where something is sufficiently niche or its in the best interest of the community to allow a necro bump (old thread in Scammers and Warnings for example).

Tom was talking about the devs doing something with auto-expiration for old threads but its probably low priority vs other new features and bug fixes.

Problem is, if someone posts something and it is already been posted, regardless of how old, there are a number of RFDers that will crap on the poster with "hey, use the search function".

Pete_Coach wrote: ↑

Sep 15th, 2018 4:12 pm

Problem is, if someone posts something and it is already been posted, regardless of how old, there are a number of RFDers that will crap on the poster with "hey, use the search function".

Agree. I found a pet peeve thread in Off Topic that hadn't posted in for a while, so I posted in it. Sure enough someone said not to bump old threads. If I started a new thread I'm sure someone would have told me not to clutter up the forum with a new thread when there's already an existing thread on that topic, and to do a search next time.

I agree that threads like the OP posted shouldn't be bumped. But a general off-topic discussion thread like a pet peeve thread? Way better to resurrect it than start a new thread.

Pete_Coach wrote: ↑

Sep 15th, 2018 4:12 pm

Problem is, if someone posts something and it is already been posted, regardless of how old, there are a number of RFDers that will crap on the poster with "hey, use the search function".

I agree that would happen in many circumstances. But I'm not against rude regulars getting infractions for being rude.

Kiraly wrote: ↑

Sep 15th, 2018 5:55 pm

But a general off-topic discussion thread like a pet peeve thread? Way better to resurrect it than start a new thread.

I agree in this instance too. There does need to be some leniency.

Here's a bizarre example of non-noob activity which I'm totally against: A user (shall remain anonymous) resurrected 7 threads yesterday in the expired deals forum to ask the same copy/pasted question in every one of them. Seriously? There's enough topics as there is. I just wish people would stop polluting the forums with idiotic requests.

After the above 2 mod responses, I've now realized it would be too tedious to monitor all 1st time posters. There needs to be some sort of give/take though on bumping old topics. Perhaps an auto-expire attribute could be added which would lock them after 2 years or so.

MrDisco wrote: ↑

Sep 14th, 2018 3:26 am

edit: I agree with Redmask. sometimes there's a thread which has good info, or perhaps there's an update to an existing issue so a bump may be warranted.

I agree. It's a subjective decision based on the circumstances.

Perhaps one measure RFD software could take would be to warn someone who's about to post that the previous post (or the specific post they're replying to) is more than nn days/months old. The warning might even include criteria for determining if a bump is/isn't warranted.

It's not a solution, of course, but it might relieve the mods of having to manually check every post. And it should also reduce the number of subsequent posts that chide the offending poster for bumping the thread.

MrDisco wrote: ↑

Sep 14th, 2018 3:26 am

It happens. Posts in the queue do not show the age of the thread they're responding to. The only option is to manually check each thread - something i don't have the time or patience for.

edit: I agree with Redmask. sometimes there's a thread which has good info, or perhaps there's an update to an existing issue so a bump may be warranted.

Yet Redmask locks a thread which had useful information and someone bumped up instead of starting a new one. Calling it a Necro Lock
http://forums.redflagdeals.com/caa-worth-368295/8/

The thread was reported by users as having a 6 year old bump. I reviewed it and concurred with the report. CAA is oft discussed and more current/relevant info can be found via search or a new topic created. As we already noted above, such bumps being useful is rare and a subjective call is made. The general policy is that necro bumps are locked.

I agree with him and would have done the same.

Redmask wrote: ↑

Sep 28th, 2018 9:28 am

The thread was reported by users as having a 6 year old bump. I reviewed it and concurred with the report. CAA is oft discussed and more current/relevant info can be found via search or a new topic created. As we already noted above, such bumps being useful is rare and a subjective call is made. The general policy is that necro bumps are locked.

MrDisco wrote: ↑

Sep 28th, 2018 9:29 am

I agree with him and would have done the same.

Then delete those old threads entirely?

Pete_Coach wrote: ↑

Sep 29th, 2018 10:33 am

Then delete those old threads entirely?

Or make Search to go back only one year (or whatever limit you like) by default. That way those who check to see if a deal or topic has already been posted won't see older threads. That would go a long way to preventing old threads from getting bumped in the first place and would relieve moderators of the need to deal with the issue.

Let the historians, archaeologists and those who want to prove points in newer threads explicitly request Search to go back farther.

bylo wrote: ↑

Sep 29th, 2018 11:42 am

Or make Search to go back only one year (or whatever limit you like) by default. That way those who check to see if a deal or topic has already been posted won't see older threads. That would go a long way to preventing old threads from getting bumped in the first place and would relieve moderators of the need to deal with the issue.

Let the historians, archaeologists and those who want to prove points in newer threads explicitly request Search to go back farther.

I don't know how it does it, but forums like Pricescope lists after a thread opening posts similar threads with "related topics" (it does it as a sponsored ad/announcement not a post, but regardless that's the idea). Or RFD could automatically lock threads after going mute for some time (say years) and enable the wiki/community second post on all forums so people (everybody) could add to a list of related posts or related (open and locked) threads.

Redmask wrote: ↑

Sep 28th, 2018 9:28 am

The thread was reported by users as having a 6 year old bump. I reviewed it and concurred with the report. CAA is oft discussed and more current/relevant info can be found via search or a new topic created. As we already noted above, such bumps being useful is rare and a subjective call is made. The general policy is that necro bumps are locked.

MrDisco wrote: ↑

Sep 28th, 2018 9:29 am

I agree with him and would have done the same.

Here are a few from 2009 in one forum that would fit your "general policy" for locking. All of these are very old and much of the int=fo is dated and no longer valid.
when-sheridan-nurseries-weekend-blowout ... ar-782140/
ask-me-anything-about-boilers-chillers- ... ms-817769/
merged-windows-doors-633922/