What topics should or should not be revived?

[Robert]

I think generally, revival of a pinned topic is ok;

revival of a topic you started is ok;

revival of anything updated less than 6 months ago is ok.

 

So long as it's still on the original topic.

 

Looks like reviving something in the Reviews forum is ok too.

 

Thoughts?

[LoRd_SnOw]

I Believe topic revivals can be great, to an extent. For example if a user revives a topic and adds a completely random response to what the topic implys, that would just be spam and at the sametime one of those "I just wanted to increase my comulative post count" kind of post. I've seen it happen several times it can also be very aggrivating.

 

Theres also the notion if a topics discussion seems to be good, then at some point every one stops responding. Reviving that topic would probably be a good thing. As long as the response by the user who revived is on topic.

Edited May 27, 2007 by Gabriel

[Elazul Yagami]

honestly, even if a topic is years old, what's the big deal?

 

i mean naturally, if you don't revive an old topic about something you wanna say, you'll make a NEW topic on the same topic, so what's the harm really?

[Sybarite Paladin AxL]

honestly, even if a topic is years old, what's the big deal?

 

i mean naturally, if you don't revive an old topic about something you wanna say, you'll make a NEW topic on the same topic, so what's the harm really?

 

you got a point there. I mean, interesting topics should be discussed as far as they can go. people will sometimes stop responding because they have nothing to say on a topic but then other people respond and they wouldn't start responding again because of indifference and that's how a good topic gets lost.

 

reviving any topic, as long as it's a good one is ok in my book, regardless of it's age. it's better than making a new topic about it anyway

[BlackKnight]

The problem, I think, is that whenever a topic is revived, it is usually by a new member or someone similar and all they do is offer a single line response or anecdote that has little insight or thought to add to the existing discussion. It is annoying then to jump to a topic looking for new info only to find the only offering being some moron's opinion on the price of fish.

 

If something worthwhile is posted in an old topic then thats good. More often than not this isn't the case. Ultimately though, if something worth saying comes up on an old topic, it could just as easily warrant a new thread itself. The bonus of this is that people don't have to wade through pages of years-old posts to get up to speed on the matter either.

[LoRd_SnOw]

There really isn't a problem about making the same topic, just as long you the user who made the topic, didn't make it twice. Unless your thread was locked (depending on the situation of the topic's discussion), If it were a new/existing user the best thing todo would be run a search and if nothing appears or you aren't too sure of what the results were, then state it in your topic's response.

Edited May 27, 2007 by Gabriel

[Agozer]

Some very good points were raised. I don't have a problem with thread resurrection if the reviver is the one who made the topic or the reviver brings something new and truly interesting into the topic.

 

Otherwise, crap will go down, especially if the post is somekind of a general quip or a question that was already answered somewhere else, either earlier in the same topic or in some other topic.

[OverlordMondo]

I have nothing against thread revival. Conversation is always good. If someone makes a dumb post in an old thread, or the thread sucked to begin with, it may not be a great idea, but it couldn't hurt too much.

[Deoxys]

I think revive a topic with an unanswered question is ok, as long it's not a dumb question or dumb answer.

A new member sometimes revive a worthless topic (I did)

 

the staffs should lock old topics to prevent it

[Gryph]

Depends on what the reviver has to say. I think every case of thread revival must be dealt with individually and based on the merit of the content posted. Unfortunately, most thread revivals are useless.

[Shoma]

The problem, I think, is that whenever a topic is revived, it is usually by a new member or someone similar and all they do is offer a single line response or anecdote that has little insight or thought to add to the existing discussion. It is annoying then to jump to a topic looking for new info only to find the only offering being some moron's opinion on the price of fish.

 

If something worthwhile is posted in an old topic then thats good. More often than not this isn't the case. Ultimately though, if something worth saying comes up on an old topic, it could just as easily warrant a new thread itself. The bonus of this is that people don't have to wade through pages of years-old posts to get up to speed on the matter either.

 

SO in a sense, you're saying the mod/admin would have to be the judge of whether the post was worth resurrecting or not. Now you just have a base of "opinion in power" vs "opinion not in power". I think you should either allow it or dont. Me personally, i sometimes feel i have to rush my chapters when i see the 1emuadventure thread receding to the 2nd and 3rd page.

But if i had to make a choice i would have to go against my karma and depict which is revival worthy and not.

Because in a forum we shouldn't feel scared to comment or contribute to something just becuz its a couple months old.

Edited May 27, 2007 by Shoma