What's wrong with thread necromancy?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-01-01 11:22pm

If someone has something useful and interesting to contribute to an old thread, what's wrong with letting them post in it, rather than having to start an entirely new thread?

FaxModem1 · Post by **FaxModem1** » 2004-01-01 11:27pm

I wish I knew, it probably would create less threads, and repeats of the same topic over and over, but who knows.

Dorsk 81 · Post by **Dorsk 81** » 2004-01-01 11:29pm

I thought we did that anyway, mods lock threads on topics already covered and tell the poster to go and use search...

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2004-01-01 11:35pm

It depends.

For me...if they actually contributed something then I still allow it.

If it is just me-tooing or just pointless commenting that is akin to spam, then I see no reason to have the necromancy pass.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2004-01-01 11:57pm

HemlockGrey wrote:If someone has something useful and interesting to contribute to an old thread, what's wrong with letting them post in it, rather than having to start an entirely new thread?

I suppose it's alright if someone contribues something fresh and meaningful to a dead thread, resurrecting it, in essence.

However, if someone digs up the half-rotted, maggot-eaten corpse of an old dead thread just to beat on it (without adding anything new,) then this is generally a bad thing.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2004-01-02 12:57am

In many cases, thread necromancers usually contribute nothing to the thread itself. However, when someone has something significant to add, and doesn't want to make a whole new thread about it, or there's some new development on the story, then I don't see the problem.

Bug-Eyed Earl · Post by **Bug-Eyed Earl** » 2004-01-02 02:06am

What about updating a thread? Such as someone talks about something in their personal life, and 2 weeks later they bump the thread when something new happens in the situation they discussed before?

Dorsk 81 · Post by **Dorsk 81** » 2004-01-02 02:08am

I think thats what Smi meant.
It seems like a waste of a thread to make a new one when an old one can just be updated, like I did with the Computer thread I made a while back and updated it the other day.

The Aliens · Post by **The Aliens** » 2004-01-02 12:52pm

As long as its something fresh and interesting, it doesn't matter, but if someone goes on to write "Ha ha, you lost sucker!" on an old debate thread, it gets dead annoying and pushes meaningful threads farther down.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2004-01-02 01:45pm

You should post in old threads if you have something significant to say, instead of posting a new one. Resurrect one to say "Cool" or "this guy is a joke" or similar one liners and the mods will be unhappy

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2004-01-02 05:02pm

How about if there's an art thread, and the artist resurrects it to put new art pieces in it? <COUGH!> Me and my 'Phun With MSPaint!!!!11' Thread </COUGH!>

I take it that would be Kosher then?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-01-02 05:27pm

HemlockGrey wrote:If someone has something useful and interesting to contribute to an old thread, what's wrong with letting them post in it, rather than having to start an entirely new thread?

Probably the fact that what you've described generally isn't considered to be thread necromancy. Its typically post which will not provoke a significant continuation of the discussion that lead to termination.

LordShaithis · Post by **LordShaithis** » 2004-01-04 09:36am

Me too.

Super-Gagme · Post by **Super-Gagme** » 2004-01-04 10:20am

Ghost Rider wrote:It depends.

For me...if they actually contributed something then I still allow it.

If it is just me-tooing or just pointless commenting that is akin to spam, then I see no reason to have the necromancy pass.

Pffft psh pshaw, you locked a thread I brought back from like 3 days old when new info came out for the argument. Eeeevil

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What's wrong with thread necromancy?

What's wrong with thread necromancy?

Re: What's wrong with thread necromancy?

Re: What's wrong with thread necromancy?