Page 1 of 1 [ 8 posts ] 

Rocky
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,074
Location: Uhhh...Not Remulak

31 Dec 2009, 4:02 pm

I often use the Google Custom Search feature to find threads of interest. I don't see anything wrong with reviving them by adding to that discussion. I have seen one or two posts that seem to object to the practice. Can anyone tell me anything wrong with doing that? Any feedback either way would be appreciated.


_________________
"Reality is not made of if. Reality is made of is."
-Author prefers to be anonymous.


leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

31 Dec 2009, 4:38 pm

I think some folks prefer to have past debates or arguments and even some timeless issues left in the closet rather than going through them all over again for the sake of newer folks, and then there is the matter of comments being added to discussions of personal questions or situations long after the OP has been satisfied. I try to be cautious about bumping past threads of a highly-controversial nature or when a personal question or dilemma has obviously been addressed, but libraries keep books on shelves for reasons, and authors appreciate acknowledgements and questions!


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,805
Location: Banned by Alex

31 Dec 2009, 9:23 pm

To revive an occasional, specific and relevant thread? I don't see that as an issue. When a user chooses to revive multiple old topics without contribution, or for the purpose of controversy, then it is problematic. It also becomes an issue in that members may no longer be active here which can lead to frustration when questions go unanswered, or there is implied urgency for something months or years in the past.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


Rocky
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,074
Location: Uhhh...Not Remulak

01 Jan 2010, 12:53 am

Thanks for the responses. I will keep what you both said in mind, as the advice makes sense. I especially appreciate feedback from a moderator in this case.

@ makuranososhi- To avoid some of the potential problems you mentioned, I will point out that I am reviving an old thread when I do so.


_________________
"Reality is not made of if. Reality is made of is."
-Author prefers to be anonymous.


Mysty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,762

01 Jan 2010, 2:55 pm

I think it depends on the thread.

I also think it makes a difference whether it's done with awareness that it's an old thread.


_________________
not aspie, not NT, somewhere in between
Aspie Quiz: 110 Aspie, 103 Neurotypical.
Used to be more autistic than I am now.


Rocky
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,074
Location: Uhhh...Not Remulak

01 Jan 2010, 10:51 pm

Mysty wrote:
I think it depends on the thread.

I also think it makes a difference whether it's done with awareness that it's an old thread.


Thanks for the feedback. I agree. I would not revive a thread that included any borderline flames or borderline trollish posts. I would point out in my post that it has been revived.

As I said in another thread (General Forum) I hate to think that I missed out on contributing to all the great threads posted before I discovered WP. Others have asked people not to create threads that cover topics that have already been covered before on WP, since people can find and read them via Google Custom Search.


_________________
"Reality is not made of if. Reality is made of is."
-Author prefers to be anonymous.


parts
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2005
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,579
Location: New England

04 Jan 2010, 11:21 pm

makuranososhi wrote:
To revive an occasional, specific and relevant thread? I don't see that as an issue. When a user chooses to revive multiple old topics without contribution, or for the purpose of controversy, then it is problematic. It also becomes an issue in that members may no longer be active here which can lead to frustration when questions go unanswered, or there is implied urgency for something months or years in the past.


M.


You mean all 32,151 members are not active just how many are and can there be a listing of that number to get real perspective on how may people are really here


_________________
"Strange is your language and I have no decoder Why don't make your intentions clear..." Peter Gabriel


VincentVanJones
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 8 Sep 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 462

04 Jan 2010, 11:27 pm

parts wrote:
makuranososhi wrote:
To revive an occasional, specific and relevant thread? I don't see that as an issue. When a user chooses to revive multiple old topics without contribution, or for the purpose of controversy, then it is problematic. It also becomes an issue in that members may no longer be active here which can lead to frustration when questions go unanswered, or there is implied urgency for something months or years in the past.


M.


You mean all 32,151 members are not active just how many are and can there be a listing of that number to get real perspective on how may people are really here


Visitors: 461
Members: 144
New Today: 29
New Yesterday: 25
Latest: RezonAce