Bumping threads

[FeroxFemina]

Do you prefer people here to bump old threads about topics they have a question about or, would you rather they started a completely new and fresh thread?

If I have something I want to ask I always use the search function and see if it's come up before, if my question was answered etc and if not I usually start a new thread.

Is this wrong? Does this annoy people? Or do you think old threads should be allowed to go to rest and that fresh opinions should be welcomed?

(P.S. I apologise if this has been asked before! :newangel

 

[petite]

I've done both. Sometimes it works out, but if the thread is already really long and you add your question to the end of it, there seems to be a post limit where people stop reading the entire thread and just read the OP and then answer it without reading through to the end, so adding my question to the end of an old long thread was futile. All the posts behind mine directly answered the OP and ignored all other posts, and my question quickly got lost among all the new posts from other members. Sometimes within the hour, the thread had a whole new page, which meant that no one would read my question and no one had answered it. It seems to be the nature of forums to work like that.

So if a thread is only 2-3 pages long, bumping it can work, but if it's longer than that, it seems like it might be a total waste of effort.

 

[FeroxFemina]

That's pretty much what I do... I don't want to be annoying anyone by it though. Sometimes searching keywords, tags etc, just takes ages and I don't find the answers I'm after.

 

[midlifebear]

If a previous thread is two or more years old, I'm al for starting a new one.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

If the old thread is too long or too old, I would rather start a new one and provide a link to the previous one so that people can view it at their own discretion.

 

[willow78]

Bump! :tongue:

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

I think it depends on the thread your gravedigging. If it's ancient and many many many pages long chances are reviving it wont necessarily kick-start the kind of discussion you may have been intending.

But if it's ancient and doesn't seem to have had a lot of attention adding a new post to it may put a new spin on a discussion which had quickly petered out and your gravedig may be productive.

If it's not ancient and has lots of responses but has lain fallow for a while gravedigging may be reviving a discussion people enjoyed but forgot about and it could be worth reminding people of it.

If its not ancient and got little response then I tend to presume no one was interested in it and maybe starting another thread with a slightly more interesting slant on the question might be a better idea than gravedigging.

 

[sumyungguy]

Do you prefer people here to bump old threads about topics they have a question about or, would you rather they started a completely new and fresh thread?

If I have something I want to ask I always use the search function and see if it's come up before, if my question was answered etc and if not I usually start a new thread.

Is this wrong? Does this annoy people? Or do you think old threads should be allowed to go to rest and that fresh opinions should be welcomed?

(P.S. I apologise if this has been asked before! :newangel

Ok, this bugs me a little lol I'm not saying your wrong, cause technically there are no rules when it comes to this. Maybe there should be some program that deletes threads older than a certain age. If active/open, why not use them? I mean the thread addressing your question is already there and to create more threads would create a jumbled cluttered mess of threads talking about the same thing. I usually revive an old thread regardless of how old it is, IF I feel its necessary and the subject is relevant. It's honestly not hurting anyone by reviving an old thread IMO.

And people have to take into account that new members are signing up all the time and they weren't there when the thread was created. Also, putting a brand new two cents in can add some perspective. It also bothers me when people, not just here but every forum, get upset and post comments about the thread being old (so what!) . It's still the same subject and someone else has something to say about it.

 

[Hoss]

Do you prefer people here to bump old threads about topics they have a question about or, would you rather they started a completely new and fresh thread?

If I have something I want to ask I always use the search function and see if it's come up before, if my question was answered etc and if not I usually start a new thread.

Is this wrong? Does this annoy people? Or do you think old threads should be allowed to go to rest and that fresh opinions should be welcomed?

(P.S. I apologise if this has been asked before! :newangel

I've been criticized by at least 2 Mods and a few members for reviving dormant threads.
I place a word in search & reply, I don't check the date the last post was made. Even if a thread lay silent a while, there's a chance the membership has changed. New members with new ideas and even readng through the earlier posts can inspire replies from members old & new. If there should be a time liimit, then there should be a system that automatically locks a thread after a set time.

I've also seen members griping that a topic already exists. Seems like control freaks that'll make it wrong regardless what you do.

I think it depends on the thread your gravedigging. If it's ancient and many many many pages long chances are reviving it wont necessarily kick-start the kind of discussion you may have been intending.

But if it's ancient and doesn't seem to have had a lot of attention adding a new post to it may put a new spin on a discussion which had quickly petered out and your gravedig may be productive.

If it's not ancient and has lots of responses but has lain fallow for a while gravedigging may be reviving a discussion people enjoyed but forgot about and it could be worth reminding people of it.

If its not ancient and got little response then I tend to presume no one was interested in it and maybe starting another thread with a slightly more interesting slant on the question might be a better idea than gravedigging.

A prme example of thread revival was here http://www.lpsg.org/33080-were-any-of-the-disciples.html
I placed Albania in the search and it came up. The subject interested me and made a reply. The thread went from 25 replies to more than 60, it more than doubled which says that a revival can have a chance, that thread had been asleep 4+ years.

 

[john_hiemer]

I am especially bothered by this. It's alright if someone has a question to resurrect an old relevant thread, but most of the time a 'bump' is used by one of those instant messenger jerks that go fishing for cam buddies- they rarely contribute anything to the site. Here is a prime example:

http://www.lpsg.org/201883-7-5x7-cam-2-cam.html

 

[Gillette]

If the old thread is too long or too old, I would rather start a new one and provide a link to the previous one so that people can view it at their own discretion.

This.

 

[Bbucko]

Experience shows that the majority of bumped zombie threads (save for the Celebrity Endowments forum) involves score-settling rather than any fresh approach to the topic. I find it especially idiotic when someone quotes (and attempts pwnage of) an ancient post, especially when the member being quoted has been banned, disabled or else long-since inactive.

It smacks of grave-dancing and/or corpse-kicking: yuck!

 

[petite]

I have to say, I love it when someone bumps an old but truly hilarious or interesting thread. I think it was Cal who bumped the threads about weird injuries men have claimed to have gotten because their dicks are too big? Jeez, I laughed so hard my shirt was wet from the tears streaming down my face. Those were genius! Those need to be regularly revived, so they can be enjoyed over and over again.

 

[The Dragon]

A few started by Lord Pendragon and the Lass with the Arab lovers are forum gold and need to be bumped so new waves of newbies can enjoy them as much as we did when they were created.

It was so great, back then when any thread could devolve into a flesh pile at the drop of a hat.

 

[Gillette]

I find it especially idiotic when someone quotes (and attempts pwnage of) an ancient post, especially when the member being quoted has been banned, disabled or else long-since inactive.

It smacks of grave-dancing and/or corpse-kicking: yuck!

I am so pwning this post in three years time.

 

[B_subgirrl]

I hate it when people have a common issue or question and don't try searching before they post. I would much rather people searched, read threads on similar topics, then only created a new thread if their questions hadn't been answered. Three or four threads on 'How can I have anal sex with my boyfriend's big penis?' in one week are too many. The same question gets asked over and over again (I don't just mean this in regards to the anal questions!), and the same advise is given. Just do a search people!

I also really hate it when old threads are resurrected just so people can say 'Me too' or something equally lacking in detail. If you're going to resurrect, say something substantial.

 

[willow78]

.....I also really hate it when old threads are resurrected just so people can say 'Me too' or something equally lacking in detail.....

Me too! :tongue:

 

[Hoss]

*******B*U*M*P******

 

[deleted3782]

I've done my fair share of graving digging...because...I like the dialog through time that includes perspectives of members from the past...and I think their perspectives and viewpoints remain valuable. I suppose I just enjoy intertemporaneous continuity...ya I just made that term up.