Thread Age Guidelines Question

[horshack.sixpack]

Seems posters get equally bashed for:

1) Starting a new thread when a "current" thread is available on the same or similar topic; a cry to use the search feature often ensues along with various insults, incredulous posts and questions of the poster's intelligence and basic grasp of messageboardology.

2) Actually searching for something on a topic that interests them, posting to the thread and thus resurrecting a thread that is "too old"; thus ensues various insults, incredulous posts and questions of the poster's intelligence and basic grasp of messageboardology.

Seems 2) actually results in quicker locking, so it must be more reprehensible.

Define "current" as in don't start a new thread and "too old" as in please do start a new thread.

The engineers on here need some firm guidelines...

 

[BulldogBlitz]

sometimes i see #1 and see the dogpile, but have a hard time deciphering the "same" topic thread based off of nebulous titles.

#2 is just plain funny. i've been guilty of it here. it is a tiny bit confusing to see mention of "tyler russell in the game saturday" because i'm just lazy and hardly read the date and time stamp. on here, it is forbidden... other message boards, not so much.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

Other mods can speak for themselves but if there has been no activity on a thread for months, and a thread is revived for no good reason, then I lock it up and let it fall off the page. If someone revives an old thread because new information has come up related to the original, OK maybe then let it go. Even then though, you could always link the original thread and post the new information. Particularly on longer threads, some posters don't like scrolling through all of that again, maybe more specifically on the mobile view.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

Don't bump a thread over a week old is a good rule of thumb

 

[HD6]

Three years=way too much.