Homebrew01

We tell people to use the search function, and so they do, sometimes to revive old threads

I propose that the next website upgrade include a new feature. When a post more than 4 months old is revived, a dead horse icon shows in the thread listing to give us all fair warning. Or perhaps a RIP tombstone would work ......
Or maybe we're better off without the search option afterall.

rollin

ask me again in 2013

datlas 

I am sure this was already addressed in a prior thread, why don't you use the search function??

Seriously, not a bad idea....there are tradeoffs between asking the same question anew versus adding it on to an old thread.

Nachoman

My crystal ball tells me somebody is going to bump this thread in about six months.

Beaker

if only we could get the next upgrade to differentiate between useful threads being updated (equipment reviews etc.) vs those discussing the names of Michael Jackson's kids.

JohnDThompson 

How about a "zombie" icon?

blacksquid

+1 on the zombie icon.

khatfull

That would require the mods to listen to and consider user suggestions...

EDIT: An a serious answer would be to prohibit posting to threads that have gone more than 6 months without a post.

Homebrew01

That would work ... maybe only the OP can bing it back, such as follow-ups or updates.

DaveSSS 

There's nothing wrong with keeping old threads available, but those who find them should be looking for a problem solution, not to post witty comments on a ong-dead subject. That's beating a dead horse.

It's also not wise to resurrect very old threads with many postings that have become so old they're no longer relevant. If the answer in not in the old thread, start a new thread, so the comments are current.

McTufferton

^^Agreed. However, it seems to be a touchy subject. People ***** when someone doesn't use the search function. Then, people ***** when someone uses the search function and revives an old thread.

khatfull

My son, you have found BF enlightenment. "Quickly as you can, snatch the sarcasm from my hand. When you can take the sarcasm from my hand, it will be time for you to leave."

umd

Well of course the idea is to search to find the answer, not search to find one of the many threads where a question has been asked and ask it again.

These are not contradictory requests. We don't want to continue the discussions that have been beaten to death, it does not matter if the form is a new post or a a revived post. Maybe we need to say to search for the answer BUT DON'T REPLY next time instead of just "search"

roy5000x2

How about the thread locks after say, a year of no new activity? A lot of other boards out there do that.

Machka 

I don't understand why it bothers people when old threads get revived. What difference does it make if someone posts a new thread about a topic, or replies to an old one? If you don't want to respond to revived threads that are more than 6 months old ... don't respond to them.

Personally, I like it when the old stuff gets revived. It often brings back something we haven't talked about in a while here.

I'd prefer to leave it like it is ... allow people to search (assuming the search function actually works) for topics as far back as they may go ... and post to them.

umd

Because you get stupid stuff like the Michael Jackson thread, and a thread the other day where someone replied to a 3 year old thread with something completely off topic. If it adds to the conversation then no, it's not a big deal. But more often than not people end up replying to the old stuff in the thread rather than the new post. That can be especially annoying when it is outdated/superceeded/irrelevant material.

Anyway, I didn't start this, but I'm glad I'm not the only one annoyed by it.

10 Wheels

The same people complain both ways. Then they apply the Stupid Word.
So who is Stupid?

Tristan86

If it is off topic and irrelevant than it shouldn't be in any post, new or old. Nothing wrong with adding to an old post if there is more to be said. But with the amount of crap on this forum being posted everyday in new threads, old ones are hardly much of a problem

Gluteus

..

Velo Vol 

I agree. What's wrong with old threads? My posts stand the test of time.

Grumpy McTrumpy

a solution to a problem that doesn't exist

ls01

ssssooooo.............we have a forum, We can ask questions......... but only if we search first.............. and find that our question or topic is unique and or not been done before..... and we may not bring up old topics that we , as a forum, have archived. Do I have that straight?

Velodad

The mods should remove those while they are new.

umd

How do you get "angry" from "annoyed"?

The Michael Jackson thread was silly but not really a problem when originally posted. It was only a problem when it was bumped because everyone assumed the OP was being insensitive to his death, not realizing it was really several years prior...

Homebrew01

If there was a RIP icon, then we'd know they are old before looking.