Poll.... You Decide Should We Issue Warnings For Posting "bump" Yes Or No?

[J D 1986]

Bump

 

[LuttleOne]

I bet those that constantly bump are the ones voting "no".

 

[notforprofit]

YES PLEASE!

Any form of bumping - not just typing "bump" - should be against the rules. No matter how long it's been since the last post. Because it's obnoxious and accomplishes nothing 99.99% of the time. There are so many tools which allow people to find what they're looking for. You can watch a thread for a notification when that thread is updated. And you can search. What more do you need, lads?

 

[Anron]

There are so many tools which allow people to find what they're looking for. You can watch a thread for a notification when that thread is updated. And you can search. What more do you need, lads?

But people are stupid.....

 

[Squirrel1]

But people are stupid.....

Or just plain lazy.

 

[885840]

I understand why people "bump" threads, but why can't they say something productive like "anything new on this person?". So I'm in full support of having warnings for "bump" posts. I think initially it will be hard for some, but I think after a few weeks to a month you'll see posting quality increase.

 

[885840]

Or just plain lazy.

I think it's a mixture of stupidity and laziness. Sometimes the very thing some people are asking for are a few pages previous to their post.

 

[Anron]

I think it's a mixture of stupidity and laziness. Sometimes the very thing some people are asking for are a few pages previous to their post.

^this^

 

[abclou]

I understand why people "bump" threads, but why can't they say something productive like "anything new on this person?". So I'm in full support of having warnings for "bump" posts. I think initially it will be hard for some, but I think after a few weeks to a month you'll see posting quality increase.

"Bump" and asking for new IS THE SAME THING.
At least post a Pic or something.

 

[danerain]

While "Bump" can be annoying, banning for using it is pretty extreme and too big brotherish.

How does it get enforced? Bump, bumpety, dump, and a host of other variations are used including just quoting a previous post and adding nothing. It would be difficult to script which means someone either has to report it or a moderator has a big job.

How about just having some posting guidelines with things like
- don't bump threads without adding content within 48 hours of the last post
- no name calling
- no fighting (such as the endless fights over cut vs uncut that derail threads)
- other stuff

Then if someone abuses the guidelines they can be reported.

Seriously, why would bumping a thread be a bad thing, especially on here?

Threads about dick never die

 

[danerain]

Bump rhymes too much with Trump so I'm all for a ban

This is the only legitimate argument I've seen here

 

[danerain]

YES PLEASE!

Any form of bumping - not just typing "bump" - should be against the rules. No matter how long it's been since the last post. Because it's obnoxious and accomplishes nothing 99.99% of the time. There are so many tools which allow people to find what they're looking for. You can watch a thread for a notification when that thread is updated. And you can search. What more do you need, lads?

So, what? You'd rather someone make an entirely new thread if another thread get's "too old?"

Bumping helps to keep all of the old content together rather than spread out over multiple threads. I'm seeing too many dumb ways that this would work IRL and nothing really compelling.

 

[Squirrel1]

Seriously, why would bumping a thread be a bad thing, especially on here?

Threads about dick never die

Why? I'll give you three. Because some members bump needlessly, sometime within minutes of a previous post. Lots of the "bumpers" contribute very little content, themselves. If you are watching a thread, you get constant alerts for bump posts.

 

[abclou]

Love it. We should change "BUMP" to this-
TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP
People don't like him so it may CUT down on the People from doing this.

 

[Skinless]

Bump or any similar word or intention should be penalised.

 

[notforprofit]

So, what? You'd rather someone make an entirely new thread if another thread get's "too old?"

Bumping helps to keep all of the old content together rather than spread out over multiple threads. I'm seeing too many dumb ways that this would work IRL and nothing really compelling.

I'm not following this logic. You're saying people would make a new thread about something because the other was ... too old? That doesn't make sense.

Using the search function would make this unnecessary. Some people are just lazy.

 

[giocio]

Hopefully this idea sounds okay.

What if this website had the option, just like liking comments, the ability to bump a thread to the front of its respective section.

Instead of everyone receiving a notification that somebody replied to a thread with "bump", the thread just moves to the front page of its respective section.

I would say that in an effort to avoid people abusing this feature, people should be limited to 1-3 "bumps" per day, and they are not allowed to bump the same thread more than once per week.

 

[Bertster01]

Here’s the essence of this thread, contained in fable-form.


The miller, his son and the donkey - Wikipedia

 

[Alkaz]

A lot of forums seem to be getting rid of this rule rather than implementing it. Although it can be annoying it often promotes fresh chat and avoids new threads being created with people then moaning saying that there is already a thread on that topic.

I would also merge same topic threads when new ones are created so that you dont have several threads with the same topic discussing the same thing.

 

[Jjam]

What if I replaced "bump" with a self-deprecating comment?

I still don’t understand why ppl say bump?