Resurrecting ancient threads for no real reason

[Buffalo]

I'm not a fan of the latest spate of thread resurrection but it's not a problem really. I see it as less of a problem than arbitrary censorship based on somebody's idea of what a "real reason" is.

I also find it less annoying than the seemingly frequent and largely pointless polls that keep popping up. Still, maybe that's just me.

[Hertford Hoop]

Looking through old threads just shows how many posters no longer contribute.

Nothing wrong with looking at them but to resurrect a thread from 5 or more years ago is silly imo. You can spend all day and night reading back through old threads if that floats your boat but when adding posts just brings them back to the top of the pack for others to have to trail through (thinking they are new)

Try going to the local library and go through copies of the local rag to see how many journalist no longer write there.

[Kirill]

I'm not a fan of the latest spate of thread resurrection but it's not a problem really. I see it as less of a problem than arbitrary censorship based on somebody's idea of what a "real reason" is.

Real reason? A serious need to resume the old discussion: something new has come up, something important was not mentioned back then. Instead of posting just a random remark. The Priskin thread resurrection is a prime example of there being no real reason.

As a rule, more posters dislike constant thread resurrection than like it. The real challenge is to think of something new to discuss and I am sure that other posters will be more appreciative of such fresh contributions.

[QPR Rickson]

Please don't. It irritates and confuses many posters. No, it does not irritate or confuse me in the least. In fact it makes me happy. Because it gives me an excuse to issue some short-term bans if it continues

Get a life

[AH08]

I don't post much on here, so this is a genuine query.. Why is it annoying? Surely you can just not read the thread as it clearly states when it was created on the main page?

[QprQpr]

It's bad forum etiquette whatever way you dress it up.

[AH08]

I just don't understand why it's so heinous

[ArthurQPR_NYC]

mods preach caution when opening up new threads, then sh1te like this pops up about resurrecting old threads. deary me

[ArthurQPR_NYC]

also, kirill, surely you werent talking about me Bumping the chelsea v qpr match thread from our historic win, were you? I was genuinely trying to G up the faithful here.. to believe.

[Stanley]

What on earth is wrong with replying to an old thread if you have a point to make?

For precisely the reason that there is no real point being made when people do so, other than an attempt to seek attention.

I also find it less annoying than the seemingly frequent and largely pointless polls that keep popping up. Still, maybe that's just me.

Me too, so it's definitely not just you, Buffalo.

Kirill just has a subconscious fetish for polls having being so democracy-starved for most of his life.

[Kirill]

Kirill just has a subconscious fetish for polls having being so democracy-starved for most of his life.

While I like the concept of democracy, I am not impressed by its implementation across the globe. I am all for people power in deciding all sorts of issues instead of entrusting them to a few marginally elected rulers. Polls are part of people power. If I saw a majority voting that thread resurrection is indeed fun, I would gladly abandon this issue because I am personally not bothered. But from my experience on this and other forums, bringing up old threads is viewed by many people as a disruptive activity. I repeat my challenge to everyone: try and come up with new topics to discuss instead of suddenly stating that Priskin is a legend.

[MYU]

Bring up one thread might be alright if it's on subject, but bring back a thread from 2009 about Adebola, just to say "Say No to Ebola".

It might be funny for a second and we've all seen this on the net. Then there's bringing up more threads from the passed, it is disruptive activity, that's why you don't see people on other forums do this.

ArthurQPR, your one was fine if I remember, it was clear what it was for.

[Stanley]

...from my experience on this and other forums, bringing up old threads is viewed by many people as a disruptive activity. I repeat my challenge to everyone: try and come up with new topics to discuss instead of suddenly stating that Priskin is a legend.

No argument there. The occasional one can be amusing but not if it develops into a trend, like recently (then where do you draw the line?). No real point is made by doing so other than to attention-seek by the bored, idle and disruptive.

[Will M]

Thread resurrection is banned on many forums. Take your pick:

1. Can restart an old argument/feud
2. People can change their opinions, especially over 5 years which causes ill feeling and/or embarrassment
3. The confusion aspect

[SammyKojoe]

Where was this thread when i couldn't sleep due to jet lag?