The resurrection of an old topic.

[lovesmayfamilis]

I have a question, what if an old topic is raised and a discussion starts, and users actively quote the OP giving a targeted answer to his post, don't people see the date the thread was created?

I'm talking about this topic. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5397790.0

Looks like she's getting another wave of spam. The question is always relevant, but people's answers look like a conversation with the void. Whoever created this thread has been blocked. Some dumb newbie recently brought up some old threads and all the users gleefully started pushing them further, completely oblivious to the date of the first post. I complained several times about necroposting, but posts are being deleted selectively.
Does the forum need such topics? And how do we stop their discussion? Is it fair to complain about someone who quotes the author, knowing full well that quite a lot of time has passed? Is anyone interested in answers to a question that was asked a very long time ago?

[1715550073]

1715550073

[1715550073]

1715550073

[1715550073]

1715550073

[1715550073]

1715550073

[NeuroticFish]

I think that in most such cases, sooner or later a mod comes in and locks the topic.
Until then I don't think that we can do much more than just reporting.

PS. May was not even that long ago, you know there are even much older topics resurrected now and then.

[Lucius]

Such threads should be reported as "spam megathreads" with a request to the moderator to lock them. After 11 pages, no one can write anything that hasn't already been written, and therefore the thread no longer serves its purpose and does not encourage constructive discussion. A lot of threads like this should be reported as "low value topic", and then we would avoid having to discuss such things at all.

[FatFork]

Of course, different circumstances may make different courses of action more or less appropriate. For example, an old thread can be revived if new relevant information surfaces, in which case I believe it is better than creating a new one. That's not to say that all old threads are worth re-opening; some topics have been done to death, and no matter how much "new" information is posted, it won't make a difference. If a thread is so far off topic or filled with spam that it qualifies as beating a dead horse, then reporting it to moderators may be the best option.

[skarais]

I have a question, what if an old topic is raised and a discussion starts, and users actively quote the OP giving a targeted answer to his post, don't people see the date the thread was created?

Any threads that have been inactive for at least 120 days will automatically notify posters like this:

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

That means every poster will realize he posted about something on an old topic, but if it matters then I don't think that should deter him from posting instead of creating a new thread. But the thing is, some posters are purposely bumping that thread for something so insignificant. In some cases such posts will be deleted, and the thread will be locked by the moderator.

[Welsh]

That means every poster will realize he posted about something on an old topic, but if it matters then I don't think that should deter him from posting instead of creating a new thread. But the thing is, some posters are purposely bumping that thread for something so insignificant. In some cases such posts will be deleted, and the thread will be locked by the moderator.

As long as it's fairly substantial, and contributes to the discussion it doesn't matter all that much. The problem is, we've got several threads being bumped that were posted back in 2013, 2012, 2011, and with no actual contribution whatsoever.

Contribution doesn't just mean being substantial, and not be classed as good quality, but it has to add something to the conversation, and typically this isn't done a lot when you go a certain amount of time back.

However, there's plenty of examples of users necroposting correctly. It doesn't always warrant a new thread, although I'd say in the majority of the cases it's probably the better idea.

[skarais]

As long as it's fairly substantial, and contributes to the discussion it doesn't matter all that much. The problem is, we've got several threads being bumped that were posted back in 2013, 2012, 2011, and with no actual contribution whatsoever.

In my case, I tend to consider substance or something important before bumping my old thread. Urgency and something important I should consider instead of creating a new thread for the same discussion.

There are a lot of old threads bumping by newbies lately, I know they are useless because something they post is not substantial. All user need to avoid it, because chances are that if this newbie post gets deleted for being reported then the post below it will also be deleted.

[Upgrade00]

I have a question, what if an old topic is raised and a discussion starts, and users actively quote the OP giving a targeted answer to his post, don't people see the date the thread was created?

They either do not check the date or do not care about it, but are only motivated to make more ooss and fulfill their post quota for the week. This is correct for most of the cases, although there would be outliers where the conversation was rightly bumped up and users are contributing new and relevant pieces of information to any who is still interested in the topic.

Does the forum need such topics? And how do we stop their discussion? Is it fair to complain about someone who quotes the author, knowing full well that quite a lot of time has passed? Is anyone interested in answers to a question that was asked a very long time ago?

• No, not after it has been extensively discussed.
• Report such thread to the mods, suggesting it should be locked.
• This should be considered on a case by case basis. Some threads are still relevant 2 years after they were first posted and some discussions remain open even after much time has passed and much has been said. But for majority of the cases, it doesn't add anything new to the forum or to the discussion.

[Findingnemo]

I have a question, what if an old topic is raised and a discussion starts, and users actively quote the OP giving a targeted answer to his post, don't people see the date the thread was created?

I'm talking about this topic. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5397790.0

Looks like she's getting another wave of spam. The question is always relevant, but people's answers look like a conversation with the void. Whoever created this thread has been blocked. Some dumb newbie recently brought up some old threads and all the users gleefully started pushing them further, completely oblivious to the date of the first post. I complained several times about necroposting, but posts are being deleted selectively.
Does the forum need such topics? And how do we stop their discussion? Is it fair to complain about someone who quotes the author, knowing full well that quite a lot of time has passed? Is anyone interested in answers to a question that was asked a very long time ago?

Actually the topic mentioned in OP is locked so that is the answer how can we stop those necro bump posters simply by using the report to moderator button. Even I had some experience that their post didn't deleted after the report for s while or it just left unhandled so it depends on what mods decide about the topic and bump from random one worth to be discussed further or not.

[joker_josue]

Personally I think it all depends on each case. In my view, it is not the age of the topic that dictates whether it is relevant to be talked about again or not.

Most of these cases, the topics that revived, were found in some Google search. The question now is: why was an old topic found and not a new one? Because maybe a new one doesn't exist. But, if the person searched in order to find this topic, it is because the content of this topic is relevant to that person.

If it's relevant to that person, why do we have to say that it's not and that it's all been said? Or why does that person have to open a topic on the same topic, if that topic already exists?

As I said, it all depends from case to case. But I don't think it's correct to associate the riviver with an old topic, like spam or just for counting posts. By the way, for counting posts it is much easier to pick up topics that are created every day and talk there, than to walk in the depths of the forum.

So, I think the first thought we should have is: is the subject being posted again associated with the OP? Is it connected to the debate that had been going on? Of course we can say, that it might make more sense to start a new topic. Because this even allows analyzing the idea from a different perspective. But, I see no problem reviving topics, if what is being debated remains in the same line of reasoning.

With this I just want to say, that I don't think we should generalize these cases, because each case is a case. And it shouldn't always be considered spam or for the purpose of counting posts.

[Despairo]

In this thread, it's valid to say someone necro bumping an old post since the gap between the last reply before the recent post is above 4 months. I'm just wondering if there's an old topic that keep discussed, but someone want to reply it after 3 months later. It's can't be said as necro bump since there's no warning message, technically the forum still allow you to post and wouldn't consider it as necro bump.

But IMO 3 months is already long, 1 month is already long too since those thread will be on few pages especially an active board like Bitcoin discussion.